the queen is a pawn. simple.
I don't understand what this comment mean
You mean:
awww...silly and cute :D
the queen is a pawn. simple.
I don't understand what this comment mean
You mean:
awww...silly and cute :D
The queen obviously suffers from a lack of contentment. She must constantly go galavanting about all over the board, never happy in one place, while the king is perfectly satisfied just kicking up his feet and spectating.
When King is mere stationary spectator, someone has to take the responsibility and be dynamic!
Seriously though, what's your issue with genders? You seem to love to bring up gender type conversations. It's kind of weird.
Don't take it personal , I was talking about chess pieces and their capacities!!!
In the 1990's, when I was a child, I tried to learn chess by playing a CD-rom chess game (internet was not that popular those days)
When I saw the powerful piece I really imagined it was the King. Perharps I was just a machist kid, but in my defence I should say the King in that game had ornamental flowers designed inside it, making it looks even more feminine.
My confusion about this issue was broke when someone finally told me the real rules of chess.
By the way, about the question, the queen is not the boss!! In chess everything turns arround the king. If you see any situation where a queen trade or sacrifice can save your king you will allways do it. But there is no goal that justifies a "king sacrifice".
That was the whole point. The game is based on sacrifice of queen for a king, while it could have been vice versa. The queen has to fight the whole battle for a lame sedentary king's defence!
So does the pawns, so at the end the queen is just a glorified pawn, who can be dispose and is not necesarilly essential. Now the question would be why calling that piece the queen? I guess someone was comparing lions to chess.
In the 1990's, when I was a child, I tried to learn chess by playing a CD-rom chess game (internet was not that popular those days)
When I saw the powerful piece I really imagined it was the King. Perharps I was just a machist kid, but in my defence I should say the King in that game had ornamental flowers designed inside it, making it looks even more feminine.
My confusion about this issue was broke when someone finally told me the real rules of chess.
By the way, about the question, the queen is not the boss!! In chess everything turns arround the king. If you see any situation where a queen trade or sacrifice can save your king you will allways do it. But there is no goal that justifies a "king sacrifice".
That was the whole point. The game is based on sacrifice of queen for a king, while it could have been vice versa. The queen has to fight the whole battle for a lame sedentary king's defence!
So does the pawns, so at the end the queen is just a glorified pawn, who can be dispose and is not necesarilly essential. Now the question would be why calling that piece the queen? I guess someone was comparing lions to chess.
comparing queen with a pawn is insane , do the capaciies or capabilities of both are same?
What about the pawns? Are they male or female? If they're male, how come they promote to queens? More like "drag queens", I guess...
If they're female, how come they can promote to bishops? The members of the clergy are all male, you don't see a pawn promoting to nun!
And what the hell is a rook?
What about the pawns? Are they male or female? If they're male, how come they promote to queens? More like "drag queens", I guess...
If they're female, how come they can promote to bishops? The members of the clergy are all male, you don't see a pawn promoting to nun!
And what the hell is a rook?
Pawn: A hermaphrodite peon until it promotes.
Rook: Depends on the context in which it is used.
And what the hell is a rook?
The rook was suppose to be a War chariot, but the Europeans changed it to a tower format.
A propósito, é por isso que a chamamos de torre, obviamente...
pawns are baby queens
(or ..more like a fetus, before gender is determined, until promotion is decided)
Now the question would be why calling that piece the queen? I guess someone was comparing lions to chess.
titled queen because the power and position that the piece holds.
pawns are baby queens
(or ..more like a fetus, before gender is determined, until promotion is decided)
Cute thinking :) I loved this idea.
The queen is often overrated. Two rooks are stronger; and in closed rook/minor piece vs queen positions, the rook/minor piece combo might have the advantage, if placed aggressively enough.
The queen doesn't defend very well, but is primarily an attacking piece. Rooks and minor pieces can do both. The queen has only one defensive/attacking ray which two other pieces outmatch. Also, the queen doesn't blockade pawns well. There is a concept known as the tyranny of the weak, which states that the less valuable piece has first priority when controlling a square.
To sum up, the queen performs well in its strengths, but is outmatched in its weaknesses.
Is the queen the boss? Of what? There is a serious lack of material here to answer on; but I hope that I am the boss when I command my pieces into battle. Also, I care far more about my king than by queen. If we are talking about rank (in terms of power), then the rooks are my no 1.
The queen can reach from 21 to 27 of the 66 squares on an empty chessboard, depending on where she is placed. Two rooks, 28 squares. Two bishops, 25 squares.
April Fools' Day isn't until tomorrow.
What about the pawns? Are they male or female? If they're male, how come they promote to queens? More like "drag queens", I guess...
If they're female, how come they can promote to bishops? The members of the clergy are all male, you don't see a pawn promoting to nun!
And what the hell is a rook?
I can't believe you're asking this! Don't you ever even talk to your pieces? Each pawn is a group of soldiers, so in each group they have at least one that can promote to any of the pieces.
Brilliant!!