Is it unpolite to make three queens?

Sort:
Fish_Ninja

Fewest moves, most direct result is the correct way of playing.  Cashing in with a slew of dames speaks volumes to the world that you dinna know what you're doing.

December_TwentyNine

It's hard to say. The reason why one would want so many Queens could be due to the following:

1. The player losing refuses to resign, and the player promoting such Pawns to Queens is doing so to spite his opponent for not resigning.

2. The player promoting such Pawns to Queens is trolling.

3. The player promoting such Pawns to Queens discussed this with his opponent, and his opponent agreed to such a trivial thing. It's a challenge to see if he doesn't accidently stalemate the game with too many Queens on the board.

DjonniDerevnja

My reason was, he dont resign, then I can do exactly what I want, and I wanted to show him that I was crushing , the boss. I dont think this is good or nice behavior. I am an extremely kind man, but still got some evil inside. And I did want to release some evil. And it felt like a victory to dominate so hard that I really could have three queens. 

LightYearz
DjonniDerevnja wrote:

My reason was, he dont resign, then I can do exactly what I want, and I wanted to show him that I was crushing , the boss. I dont think this is good or nice behavior. I am an extremely kind man, but still got some evil inside. And I did want to release some evil. And it felt like a victory to dominate so hard that I really could have three queens. 

That is hilarious!

December_TwentyNine
DjonniDerevnja wrote:

My reason was, he dont resign, then I can do exactly what I want, and I wanted to show him that I was crushing , the boss. I dont think this is good or nice behavior. I am an extremely kind man, but still got some evil inside. And I did want to release some evil. And it felt like a victory to dominate so hard that I really could have three queens. 

But why stop there hunnie? Why not have EVEN MORE Queens?



Under-The-Tide

Or maybe it just shows that you don't have the skill to checkmate with something other than three queens :)))

comeandtakeit15

i always try

DjonniDerevnja
December_TwentyNine wrote:
DjonniDerevnja wrote:

 

But why stop there hunnie? Why not have EVEN MORE Queens?

 



My opponent timed out (online 3-days) when I queened number three.

DjonniDerevnja
Under-The-Tide wrote:

Or maybe it just shows that you don't have the skill to checkmate with something other than three queens :)))

if you have the skills to get three queens against a 1700+ rated, you probably have the skills to mate with only bishop,king and knight.

December_TwentyNine

...and do it vs. his Lone King, and in under 3 minutes once the position is reached.

DjonniDerevnja
BLACK_STAR_RIDER wrote:

just be aware that your opponent might find a way to stalemate, as the game continues. otherwise, get them Queens, it`s good to have internet, as my board only got one extra Queen...

I sometimes have used a tower upsidedown as second queen. Once in a blitzmatch I accidentaly fumbled my tower so it landed on the head. My opponent turned it immidiately and said that i hadnt two queens.

December_TwentyNine

That's why most sets nowadays come with cheerleader Queens.

DjonniDerevnja
yes_dear wrote:

Fewest moves, most direct result is the correct way of playing.  Cashing in with a slew of dames speaks volumes to the world that you dinna know what you're doing.

I think that getting two queens, often is a faster way to mate than thinking out some clever way with fewer moes. A safe mate in 10 seconds and ten moves inkluding getting extra queen is better than a tactical mate in four that needs three minutes of thinking to make sure you dont step wrong when its little time left on the clock. A mate in ten with extra queen is actually fast when you measure in seconds, not in moves. In otb and livechess number of moves doesnt matter, but the seconds can be desicive.

December_TwentyNine

I agree. If you are winning the end game, you want to take your time with it...you never know, your opponent may suddenly resign, saving you the hassle! Anyone can become overwhelmed with emotions with winning and blunder the game away!

Sophiexxx

Nah it is fun :D

Mayedasun

If the dude doesn't resign punish him IMO. 

Sophiexxx

Yes so true!

Under-The-Tide
DjonniDerevnja wrote:
Under-The-Tide wrote:

Or maybe it just shows that you don't have the skill to checkmate with something other than three queens :)))

if you have the skills to get three queens against a 1700+ rated, you probably have the skills to mate with only bishop,king and knight.

Once you get a queen and you're up material, you can pretty much get another few easily if you have a few pawns to spare...

DjonniDerevnja
Under-The-Tide wrote:
DjonniDerevnja wrote:
Under-The-Tide wrote:

Or maybe it just shows that you don't have the skill to checkmate with something other than three queens :)))

if you have the skills to get three queens against a 1700+ rated, you probably have the skills to mate with only bishop,king and knight.

Once you get a queen and you're up material, you can pretty much get another few easily if you have a few pawns to spare...

It is very difficult to become material up playing against wellplaying 1700+ players.

Scottrf

Not if you're 2600.