Promoting pawns when you are ahead in material...Rude?

thaxiss

The child was playing bad chess (as has already been pointed out, the extra material makes a draw more likely) Bad sportsmanship? You bet, tho it's just an 8 year old enjoying himself. But if so, it's an issue for the parent, not the TD, who should have kept his mouth shut.

The thing about being humiliated is a non issue. If you don't have the sense to resign a lost position, you're humiliating your self.

I've been accused of over promoting. He protested when I regained my queen and already had a rooks advantage. Something about elegance, which I didn't understand.  But he was a bigger player than I, and the last thing I want to do is throw away a game because I disdained a promotion then made a mistake.

Anyone know what he meant by elegance?

nameno1had
ciljettu wrote:

I'm with wafflemaster... as long as he does not resign... I will keep on HUMILIATING him!

You have my vote too.

I was always taught not to dish out what you can't take. If I have a gnat buzzing about my face and you think I have to squish it with chop sticks instead of a flyswatter, buzz off...

hozer

I very much agree with Reb. In otb play I resign a lost position as soon as it is apparent it is lost. Is it too much to expect the same from an opponent? A few times when the opponent has not resigned a dead lost position I have promoted one or more pawns hoping to drive home the point of just how hopeless his position is.

nameno1had
joeydvivre wrote:

I also resign "early".  And I don't like it when people play out lost positions, but I also don;t need to humiliate anyone in chess.

I think you are onto something but, you miss the idea that some people make fools of themselves...

DKof
thaxiss wrote:

. . .Anyone know what he meant by elegance?

An elegant solution is often contrasted to a brute force solution.  Elegance is associated with small numbers, surgical precision and cleverness while brute force is associated wih overwhelming numbers, blunt instruments and no need for a plan. 

But what he really meant was waah, waah, now I have no hope of scamming a victory out of this game.

nameno1had
DKof wrote:
thaxiss wrote:

. . .Anyone know what he meant by elegance?

An elegant solution is often contrasted to a brute force solution.  Elegance is associated with small numbers, surgical precision and cleverness while brute force is associated wih overwhelming numbers, blunt instruments and no need for a plan. 

But what he really meant was waah, waah, now I have no hope of scamming a victory out of this game.

Are we always really reduced to only elegance as our M.O. ?  I don't mind if I have to win ugly. If I have an obvious 5 move mating combination that involves promotion and two more that don't, but my opponent has three chances in each scenario to have to make me recalculate, a few more different times when he doesn't make the strongest moves, thus dragging the game out, I think I'll save my tylenol and go for the obvious.

AnthonyCG

Getting 20 rooks is really unnecessary. Just trap his king on one file and run the rook up and down the board. He should get the message then.



Chessking47
Reb wrote:
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" ?  

There is on ChessCube tournaments

DaveOakRidges

It would be rude if you were saying "Nyah Nyah Na Na Nah" and making " moose antlers" while doing so...

AnthonyCG
DaveOakRidges wrote:

It would be rude if you were saying "Nyah Nyah Na Na Nah" and making " moose antlers" while doing so...

I saw that once.

Charlotte

alot of it depends on the timescale of the game. it may be ok to take the mickey in a quick game, with an opponent rated at your level, but some of the examples i've seen on this thread could take years to play out the speed i move at. if you have nothing better to do than promote all your pawns to something less than a rook, you really need to go on a long walk to clear your head.

fyy0r

You have the right to promote as many pawns as you want into any piece you want to torture your opponent for as long as you want.  If he doesn't like it he should resign.   It was his fault for playing badly anyways.

graceout

There is no rudeness in chess -- only rules.  As long as you're making legal moves, no one has a right to complain.  I've had losing opponents walk away and let their clock run down (as close to rude as you can get) -- but I still offer a handshake - if I see them again.  Chess is also psycological -- and if racking up a few queens is intimidating, so be it.  As others have already stated, creating your own stalemate is the only potential drawback.

"Rude" is violating touchmove, asking for a take-back, or hoping no one notices that you're castling with a king that has already moved.  (Or crying about a 'mouse-slip'.)

chapablanca2000
[COMMENT DELETED]
graceout
AnthonyCG wrote:

Getting 20 rooks is really unnecessary. Just trap his king on one file and run the rook up and down the board. He should get the message then.

Umm.... you can't get more than 10 rooks ....
AnthonyCG
graceout wrote:

...There is no rudeness in chess -- only rules...

Life has rudeness and rules.

AnthonyCG
graceout wrote:
AnthonyCG wrote:

Getting 20 rooks is really unnecessary. Just trap his king on one file and run the rook up and down the board. He should get the message then.

Umm.... you can't get more than 10 rooks ....

kyska00

If you consider the promotion of a pawn when ahead in material rude, you should also consider the continued playing of the game on the part of the person who is down in material even ruder.

waffllemaster

Hey I just though of an even better way.

Not only do you promote all your pawns, but then you sacrifice them 1 by 1 until you have just a king and a rook, and win from there Laughing

Seareader

I think it wastes time, but every player has a right to play as they would like without justification to others. If I wanted to get 4 queens and play around for a few minutes I shouldn't have to justify that to anyone who is not playing the game.