Pawn Promotion Is Ridiculous

My first response to this suggestion is this puzzle:

And this one:

Both of these the only winning moves are to promote to knights, whether 3 or 8 of them end up on the board. Feel free to check out my underpromotion thread for more examples of why sometimes multiple underpromotions are necessary, (one of which requires 5 consecutive bishop promotions!)

https://www.chess.com/forum/view/endgames/best-underpromotion-endgame-compilation

My 2nd response is what would you propose for the pawn instead? To stay as a stale pawn on the 8th/1st rank?

Well then it's not the problem with pawn promotion. It's just your opponent's problem for being bad.

or its your problem for being good

And what if your opponent doesnt let you trade queens?

remember

this is a position, where i can promote multiple pawns easily

i probably have enough control for that

You're saying it like it's easily achievable every time. But then again, what's the need to promote to more than one queen?

what if the new queens promotion spot is actively controlled by an enemy piece so the real result of the promotion is the win of a rook or something

e.g.

My very problem with this is that it makes the game wayyyyy easier when it shouldn't be.

easier?

again

if a player can promote multiple pawns easily, he IS dominating the position AND thus deserves the easiness for his presumed good play beforehand

why punish him for playing good and getting to that position?

Whether you like it or not. Restricted pawn promotion is objectively wayy more strategic than not restricted version.

see endgame enthusiasts puzzles

and "wayy" more??

its not that much

it just forces the person to learn KQK and KQRK checkmates

also those sort of trades i mentioned earlier?

thats strategy for white to have gotten the pawn there, and this is his reward?

also KNNNK

and the insanities of KQQKQQ and such?

and the puzzles?

and the strategy added by restricted is....

punishing someone for good play

forcing them to learn basic checkmates

your argument might as well be wayyy too exaggerated, IF NOT flipped

Uhmmm you do realise that that these are intended puzzles can be only solved if you have like 1000 bishops or something. It's just an exaggeration, so don't quote me on it. This particular puzzle will be invalid if the rule of the pawn promotion was restricted.

Well I propose, the pawns will just be sitting on the 7th or 2nd rank if all the pieces are still not captured. It will be another illegal move added to the game if the pawn promotes to the the pieces that exceeds the limit. I don't think you're quite getting what im saying. Let's say your one knight and two rooks get captured in the middle of the game, and then you have the pawn to promote. If you wish to promote, then you can only promote to either a knight or a rook because they are no longer present on the board. If none of your pieces get captured then you cannot legally promote. They sit on the 7th or 2nd rank until one of the pieces get captured then they can make a legal promotion.

Pawn promotion is very powerful for a reason. Creating a passed pawn is one of the most common ways of exploiting an opponent's weakness, and an integral part of chess strategy. There's really no need to create new complex rules (having different limits for queening vs underpromoting? Why?) when the current system works just fine.

Huh?

Are you just trolling me or you're just a kid who's incapable of logical thinking? Whether you're a good player or not, it really doesnt chnage the fact that multiple queen ing just breaks the very nature strategic game of chess. You shouldn't be having multiple queens and just checkmate in just like 3 moves. Chess shouldn't be this easy. There's no rewarding players for good plays or not rewarding them. It's just that having multiple queens just breaks the game.

You keep mentioning, this position, that position. Yes, this 'puzzle' only works with multiple pieces. I think you're just a 12 year old kid, trying to be an internet tough guy or something.

Wait, what? So you are saying not only should there be a universal piece limit on the board, but that pawns should only be able to promote to pieces the position is lacking?? The 2nd position I posted is very realistic, and a 3 knights endgame is a basic chess endgame. Note that if white promotes to anything else, the queen comes down to the back rank forcing white to give up one of the knights to block the check. And a 1 knight advantage in a queen vs queen endgame is extremely drawish. I don't get the 2nd part about pawns "sitting" on the 7th rank? Are you saying those pawns can't move at all if too many other pieces are on the board? So those pawns can't capture on the 8th rank either? Piece movements should be contigent on the available movement of other pieces. Also, if I understand what you are saying correctly, white couldn't promote to another queen in this position:

Having multiple of the same piece on the board doesn't mean it's an advantage, the other side can have different pieces that more than compensate.

I am trying to understand your point here, but I came up with nothing.

If there are just "pawns racing", promoting to a queen is still possible in your system. And when you promote the second pawn, it is equally easy to mate with Q + R as it is with 2 queens. I just don't get what you are trying to say here.

i would like to ask this question to you @second_account

Huh?

Are you just trolling me or you're just a kid who's incapable of logical thinking?

this question should be asked to you

Whether you're a good player or not, it really doesnt chnage the fact that multiple queen ing just breaks the very nature strategic game of chess.

what fact?

multiple queening makes the game too easy? its the opponents fault for ALLOWING multiple queens

and if both sides multiple queen we get KQQKQQ the most insane endgame in all of chess

You shouldn't be having multiple queens and just checkmate in just like 3 moves.

again

whose fault is it to allow the multiple queens

if you can make multiple queens and win that easily, its either due to you playing well; them playing poorly or both

and thus its a deserved ending

Chess shouldn't be this easy. There's no rewarding players for good plays or not rewarding them. It's just that having multiple queens just breaks the game.

"breaks the game"??

this isnt some op item that is way too easy to get

its not like you can just get another queen from nowhere

you need to be able to facilitate a pawn into the other side of the board, which is hard

You keep mentioning, this position, that position.

yeah because they are counterexamples that break your argument

you argument is that multiple queens break the game?

my argument is that 

sometimes they dont

its always after dominating the game anyway

and there are many many many many many positions where it just wins a piece or something

that sort of position happens enough times 

Yes, this 'puzzle' only works with multiple pieces.

i am not even talking about that puzzle

it is a FUNDAMENTAL part of chess that pawns can promote to whatever they want

change that... its close to chess, but not chess

I think you're just a 12 year old kid, trying to be an internet tough guy or something.

Well if you nothing but to troll people then just save it and go somewhere else.