Nope, of course you do it. If for some strange reason they are insulted by it, it is totally their problem, and should simply resign.
Promoting pawns when you are ahead in material...Rude?
Sort:
I don't get why you would feel that's rude. You have the right to do play anything you want just like your opponent has the right to play on. I consider it more rude that your opponent does not resign in such a position. Anyways whenever put into that position I would try to get two bishops and practice that mate (it helps to have a back-up pawn somewhere just in case).
I wouldn't promote multiple pawns, that is certainly piling on... but promoting one pawn is not rude IMHO.
Jason
Promote.
Un-necessary promotion should be considered rude.
So pushing your a2 and b2 paws up the board to promote when you've already got queen, rook and minor piece buzzing around a lone king? Not very nice
Promoting a pawn that's already on the 6th or 7th to end things quickly? Sure, why not
You should do whatever gets to mate the quickest.
Arctor wrote:
Un-necessary promotion should be considered rude.
So pushing your a2 and b2 paws up the board to promote when you've already got queen, rook and minor piece buzzing around a lone king? Not very nice
Promoting a pawn that's already on the 6th or 7th to end things quickly? Sure, why not
I dont agree with this. If you are in a position to do this it means your opponent is being rude by not resigning . ( unless ofcourse you are about to run out of time )
Reb, in the unspoken poker game of chess etiquette then, multiple under promotion is like "raise!"
ozzie_c_cobblepot wrote:
Reb, in the unspoken poker game of chess etiquette then, multiple under promotion is like "raise!"
I agree ..... maybe chess needs a doubling cube like backgammon has in order to make some people resign when they should OR maybe lose twice the rating points when you " double" ? 
Its up to your opponent to stop you - you do not need to stop yourself!
Reb wrote:
Arctor wrote:
Un-necessary promotion should be considered rude.
So pushing your a2 and b2 paws up the board to promote when you've already got queen, rook and minor piece buzzing around a lone king? Not very nice
Promoting a pawn that's already on the 6th or 7th to end things quickly? Sure, why not
I dont agree with this. If you are in a position to do this it means your opponent is being rude by not resigning . ( unless ofcourse you are about to run out of time )
Well there isn't exactly a general consensus on when a person should resign is there? While you might say they're being rude, they could argue that beginners are instructed to always play to the finish. And then there was also a post from a person recently who always believed it was rude to resign (quit) a lost position.
Does an action become less rude just because you percieve the person to have been rude to you? It takes a real asshole to humiliate an opponent by promoting multiple queens because they feel they were wronged by a person using their alloted time . Just checkmate the guy and move on
And playing on in a hopeless position solely to flag a player is rude in my book
I'm all about taunting.... but in terms rudeness, i would say 2 queens is enough to get a mate easily, more than that just leaves you with a greater chance of stalemate.
But hey, if you want 8 queen.... BE MY GUEST...and nvr forget to taunt
I think it is not rude if it is already close to promotion, but if you push it all the way across the board you probbly could have mated by the time you promoted the pawn.
Arctor wrote:
Reb wrote:
Arctor wrote:
Un-necessary promotion should be considered rude.
So pushing your a2 and b2 paws up the board to promote when you've already got queen, rook and minor piece buzzing around a lone king? Not very nice
Promoting a pawn that's already on the 6th or 7th to end things quickly? Sure, why not
I dont agree with this. If you are in a position to do this it means your opponent is being rude by not resigning . ( unless ofcourse you are about to run out of time )
Well there isn't exactly a general consensus on when a person should resign is there? While you might say they're being rude, they could argue that beginners are instructed to always play to the finish. And then there was also a post from a person recently who always believed it was rude to resign (quit) a lost position.
Does an action become less rude just because you percieve the person to have been rude to you? It takes a real asshole to humiliate an opponent by promoting multiple queens because they feel they were wronged by a person using their alloted time . Just checkmate the guy and move on
And playing on in a hopeless position solely to flag a player is rude in my book
We need to be clear on some things . Are we talking about online or otb ? Tournament play or club ? etc I am talking mostly about otb and tournament play . If my opponent is playing on with a lone K and I have K+Q ( and maybe more ) he IS being rude if he doesnt resign with the lone exception that I may be running out of time. If I am running out of time he may think I cant mate in time and he may salvage a draw if I do indeed flag. If I have plenty of time to mate then he should resign and not make me mate him. Yeah yeah I know all the stuff about beginners but the truth is that I almost never play beginners in tournaments anymore.... we dont play in the same sections usually.....
This is a war. Promote as much as possible. Do what you must to secure your victory.
My situation is turn-based 3=day pay online.
Correction for typo... "turn-based 3 day online"
why should your opponent resign when there is a chance you will make a mistake and stalemate? Last time i checked, chess didnt end when it looks like you might lose....
Ask Tracy Mcgrady and the Rockets, down 10(TEN) points with 35seconds left, against the Spurs(who won the NBA championship that year). They came back and won that game. DOWN 10 POINTS WITH 35SECONDS LEFT.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ceLlz7dOOvY&feature=related
What does chess etiquette have to say about promoting pawns when I'm already ahead in material? Say a bishop and two pawns.. It seems safest and fastest for me (at my skill level.. about 1400 turn-based online) to win by doing that, but it seems like piling on. Would doing so irritate people? Is it insulting to keep your advanced pawns two ranks back deliberately? What am I missing here? Thanks guys!