Cheap Moves

Sun Tzu said, "All can see the tactics whereby I conquer, but none can see the strategy out of which victory is evolved." 

On a chess board, each player has equal opportunity to see and set traps, and to carry out thier strategy to the best of their ability. With the exception of actual cheating (using an engine, getting others to play your games, etc.), are there any moves in chess that you would consider "cheap" or unsportsmanlike?

eye gouges

For me, all moves are cheap. In fact, they're free! I don't pay a cent for moves

Bird's opening is the only one with "cheep" moves

That's "chirp" moves, unless you're talking about the "shepherd variation", where there are "sheep" moves.

I usually have a few bleep moves every game

 Mybe he doesnt mind paying for his moves.

True. He could be one of those Wall Street peeps, quoting Sun Tzu on a beach.

Haha. Nice. I don't think there are any cheap moves in chess either. I am just looking for some opinions. For example, If someone fails to protect themselves and loses to a Fools Mate, was that low of the winner? Should they have not tried to go for such a novelty win? 

Or another example, I was playing a game and I was able to force a threefold repition. The opponent was higher rated than me, so I thought this was a good way to finish the game. I know it is a legitimate move, but it felt a little, i don't know, dishonorable? 

Is there any difference between a Wall Street peep and the peeps at easter?

As long as you are not cheating, there are no dishonorable moves in chess.

They're both way too rich.

No.

By any means necessary... winning is winning. 

Unless winning is somehow losing. It does happen in life...

 Go on...

A similar topic was posted, stating that attempting the four move checkmate was bad sportsmanship. The four move checkmate is one of the first traps a young player learns. It is taught at the chess school I teach for and we use it as a training tool (teaching the concept of using pieces in combination and how to defend against it). In a recent posting, a chess.com member thought it was an act of bad sportsmanship. However, it breaks no rules. Traps are completely acceptable and in no way an example of bad sportsmanship. I tend not to teach students traps and tricks in the opening, rather concentrating on how to spot traps and defend against them. As for "cheap moves," they usually end up backfiring on the chessaic criminal when a veteran player sees the "cheap move" coming and responds accordingly. I consider pointless checks a "cheap move" in that it doesn't do anything other than waste time. Trying to pull a four move checkmate on a GM is probably going to leave you in smoldering ruins. However, there are those on chess.com whom claim to have pulled the four move checkmate on GMs and have gone on to win the game (this seems a bit dubious). If the move is legal, whose to say its a cheap move (with the exception of ozziecobblepot, who through a special amendment to the USCF rules, is allowed to determine whether or not a move is cheap or priceless).

I'd say no. The object of the game is to win within the rules, so as long as you're not breaking the rules I think anything goes. We're not in the 19th century where for some reason it was considered bad manners to decline any sacrifice

I remember posting on a previous topic that I had once intentionally simplified into a K+N+B vs K ending, in the hope my opponent wouldn't know how to mate me, and he didn't. IMHO, this is his fault for not knowing the checkmate (nor do I, mind you!), not mine for having a hunch that this was the case and taking advantage of it. That's good play of a sort, isn't it?

 Not true at all. 

Sometimes my opponent moves two pieces on the same move.  Sometimes pawns do really weird things when they make it to the fifth rank.

Cheap!