17884 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
Is it possible to simply refulse to promote your pawn? I know it's silly, but is it legal?
Excellent! Thank you.
For anyone interested, here's the rule. I found it.
"When a pawn reaches the rank furthest from its starting position it must be exchanged as part of the same move on the same square for a new queen, rook, bishop or knight of the same colour. The player’s choice is not restricted to pieces that have been captured previously. This exchange of a pawn for another piece is called ‘promotion’ and the effect of the new piece is immediate."
For example, everybody knows that en passant is cheating, and that a pinned piece cannot give check. We also know that stalemating is unfair and that if you run out of time while winning you should still win.
Believe it or not, most people here are aware of the basic rules of chess.
The key word is most, because even if a very few learned that law from this thread it helped them. I am sympathetic on the behalf of beginners, because many times there is little concern for them in these threads. I well remember teaching myself chess with no help whatsoever from anyone, and I would have cherished having such help given to me back then.
Come on, lighten up, if you know something written in these threats just remember not everyone on this site knows all there is to know about chess.
I find the threads "insufficient material" most funniest.
And it's really interesting that most of the OPs persist in their claims, even when you show the "insufficient material" to be sufficient by drawing the mate for them.
They just claim to have a moral right for a certain outcome of the game.
And all of it could be easily handled by an hour spent in reading the FIDE laws of chess.
You know it's funny because I drew a game because of insufficient material a while ago and I believed that I had should have won the game. He had about seven pieces and I had a piece, I can't remember whether it was a knight or bishop but I doubt it matters when he has that amount of pawns.
chess.com was following the FIDE laws of chess(as much as a software can follow it - it cant recognize certain dead draw positions).
There was a discussion and initiative to change this to a say more convenient definition, which declares some endgames as draws(regardless of possible helpmate scenario). I'm not sure if it has been implemented yet.
Moral of the story: Ask questions, b/c nothing is more exciting than watching an elitist prick get all pissy over it.
Damn those elitist pricks that know the rules
How can I get RonaldJosephCote back?
by kayak21 a few minutes ago
que pasa con el reloj
by notmtwain a few minutes ago
12/18/2014 - Mate in 4
by NateTimms 2 minutes ago
Smartphone tactic training app
by 1ernie 4 minutes ago
How many distinct chess games are possible, and which is the longest?
by kiloNewton 5 minutes ago
If time travel was possible
by bobbyDK 6 minutes ago
by I_Am_Second 11 minutes ago
ღ OFFICIAL 2014 Chess.com Awards ღ
by macer75 13 minutes ago
Was castling two moves EARLIER?
by LouisCreed 21 minutes ago
Necessity of calculation vs impulsivity
by DavidDeMar 22 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2014 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!