If so, then this would invalidate the argument that chess should have a option for a player to leave the pawn a pawn at "promotion".
Promoting to....A PAWN ? Can it Help ?

This is something FIDE could base their argument on if pressed for a rules change. They could say this cannot help nor hurt either player. But then it would serve as akinda dormant blocker, tho' a piece could do the same.

My rating is 1540+ not 1755. You're hovering mouse lies to you........
Pleez sight ur example, if u say google has them. I can't find any.

Controlling key squares like c9 and e9 could be crucial.
Now that's thinking outside the box....

In those positions where I don't need any more pieces to win, but am feeling a little parched, I would like to promote a pawn to a bottle of beer as my reward for getting it safely to the eighth rank.

My point is alotta ppl complain about FIDE rules that you can't promote a pawn to another friendly king (kinda makes sense), a enemy piece (kinda makes sense), or let it remain a pawn (doesn't really make sense....unless we can't justify leaving it a pawn....which is the thrust of this thread).


....or if the pawn move resulted in checkmate.
That's what I'm trying to say. Someone show me a condition where leaving it a pawn would result in # where underpromoting wouldn't accomplish the same thing.
As far as flagging someone, well, I get that one, but we can't base our rulebook on flagging someone. That should be a byproduct of the game itself.

So my argument remains. If leaving it a pawn, then why would FIDE care if u promoted to a more valuable piece or not ?

As you can see, I'm trying to justify WHY you can't leave it a benign pawn. Is this just another one a those random rules that holds no saltwater ?....which is something I can't stand, BTW.
I cannot find a condition where promoting to a pawn would actually help a player.