Queening not fair
Sort:
ok so ive been thinking recently since ive now been playing chess for two weeks and can now be considered to have mastered it. why is queening allowed. all the time ill be playing a worse player and theyll be down a rook and then queen and beat me despite being down all that material. it is a cheap strategy used by weak players that dont know what there doing. if i get one more patzer beating me because of this ill quit. please fix this chess.com. how can it even possibly be considered fair.
id already be a GM by now if not for this.
Your a 2000 elo player... Surely you've promoted pieces in the past...
no. im making a stand against an unfair rule and i urge you to do the same. together we can take this down.
Its your fault you lost because YOU let them queened. Are you complained because you lost by a 1500 because YOU let them queened? It's called endgame tactics. This is funny how you want to change a rule which is part of chess millions of years ago because you lost.
If there were no queening: White resigns since you can't queen
Troll
Jul 25, 2017
0
#8
WeakChessPlayedSlow wrote:
ok so ive been thinking recently since ive now been playing chess for two weeks and can now be considered to have mastered it. why is queening allowed. all the time ill be playing a worse player and theyll be down a rook and then queen and beat me despite being down all that material. it is a cheap strategy used by weak players that dont know what there doing. if i get one more patzer beating me because of this ill quit. please fix this chess.com. how can it even possibly be considered fair.
hhhmmmm????....your blog says you have been stuck between USCF 2060 and 2110 for a year, that is more than 2 weeks isn't it????
hmm.... make's you think.... also white deserves to lose that. hes down a queen.
Congratulations! You're a great chess player, I wish I were that good!
As a troll, you are an abject failure.
WeakChessPlayedSlow wrote:
hmm.... make's you think.... also white deserves to lose that. hes down a queen.
You're partly right on that, but chess is chess. And I have won by endgame tactics before.
If we were to get rid of queening, what do you suggest should happen to the pawn when it reaches the 8th or 1st rank?
WeakChessPlayedSlow wrote:
hmm.... make's you think.... also white deserves to lose that. hes down a queen.
Well, congrats. Best troll of the week. Hahah, hey, at least pretend you're a 1100 player...
Wait, this is a joke? Oh. I think you should improve your troll skills. But your chess skills are amazing though.
Jul 25, 2017
0
#14
op, rest assured. you are not alone in this.
https://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/promoting-to-apawn--can-it-help
https://www.chess.com/forum/view/off-topic/the-sad-tale-of-the-pawn
fuzzbug,,,,, please,,,,,,,, be kind.... also, forget about rating. im a man making a stand against that which is unjust. having victory stolen from me by chumps who only have this "queening" trick and nothing else is humiliating. also, good point Iam2busy. perhaps we should phase out pawns entirely???? or i guess we can let them stay as pawns. interesting new dynamic way less cheap
Jul 25, 2017
0
#16
Sometimes I will intentionally lose a piece to advance a pawn to a position where queening can not be stopped.....planning ahead to queen or stop queening is just part of the game, same as planning ahead to checkmate in a position where your forces are inferior due to a sacrifice made along the way.
thank you for the kind words crolisto. i know id be missed
ZlyphrrPlayz wrote:
If there were no queening: White resigns since you can't queen
... which is the way that chess should be played. When one side has a queen and a king, and the other side a pawn and a king, the former should win, period.
the trolls
