What better place is there?
Some other stupid rules in chess
Sort:
A place where people take this subject somewhat seriously which is no longer possible after the opening post. I have started and contributed to rule threads myself and will do so in the future.
Good to know,thanks.
Jan 2, 2020
0
#65
Why are there no strip chess tournaments? Chess doesn't seem to be as popular today as it used to be. My idea to make it more popular would be to have players take off an article of clothing every time a piece is exchanged. The first player to get naked loses. I sure this would be very popular on tv.
DrFrank124c wrote:
............ The first player to get naked loses. I sure this would be very popular on tv.
Considering the physical state of the average chess player I'd say that his opponent is the one who loses.
Better idea: https://www.chess.com/forum/view/fun-with-chess/searching-for-befana#comment-45297834
FBloggs wrote:
It took me 2 years to realize the OP's post was satire. What was I thinking?
TremaniSunChild wrote:
Number 5: If they could move back, then there wouldn't be much deliberation over pawn moves. It's like taking back a move.
The OP asks some sincere questions but do you respond with thoughtful answers? No. Instead you interrupt a serious discussion with sarcasm. I think we've all had it up to here with your tomfoolery!
Arisktotle wrote:
The purpose of game rules is to attribute to an attractive game. By claiming that rules are stupid, you actually claim that chess is an unattractive game. Which makes you both a poor observer and a poor player - or a perfect player which I doubt.
Nevertheless there are some stupid rules in chess and they are stupid only because they cause confusion and thereby make the game less attractive. But I won't discuss them in this thread. Bra, this is just a joke. We all love chess and most of us are very good or are becoming very good relax a little.
azariyahowens wrote:
...... Bra, this is just a joke. We all love chess and most of us are very good or are becoming very good relax a little.
We live in the post truth era. Never know if someone is serious, sarcastic, ironic or flatout lying. I always make sure to provide a reply in each one of these categories 
.
Arisktotle wrote:
azariyahowens wrote:
...... Bra, this is just a joke. We all love chess and most of us are very good or are becoming very good relax a little.
We live in the post truth era. Never know if someone is serious, sarcastic, ironic or flatout lying. I always make sure to provide a reply in each one of these categories .
OK
Oct 2, 2025
0
#71
Number 6: It’s IMPOSSIBLE to make a checkmate without a pattern! This game is trash!
Oct 4, 2025
0
#72
These rules are the arts of chess, it makes chess interesting and you can make some tricky tatics through of it. Chess will be super boring if all the rules he has mentioned gone
Oct 5, 2025
0
#74
Because pawns can promote at the other side of the chess board, how come they get an advantage and start on 2nd rank instead of 1st?
Oct 5, 2025
0
#75
Why do knights move 2 squares and one square sideways instead of just 3 squares or something? This is anachronistic.
Oct 18, 2025
0
#76
torrubirubi wrote:
1. Why only the knight is allow to jump over other figures? This is simply not fair! And it complicates too much the game.
2. Why can the king not checkmate the other king? I mean, if I played well and still have a figure, why should I not be able to kill the king?
3. En passant is a horrible rule, only invented to disturb the game. Why we need such new rules? (what? The rule was introduced already in the Middle Age? Do you mean that already in this time people from FIDE were already inventing such stupid rules?)
4. I don't understand why the rules allow my opponent to checkmate me if I am up in material. This is against the principles of every game!
5. Why are the pawns not allow to move back? This is too complicated and unnecessary.
Do you have other ideas from stupid rules in chess? Stupid stalemate and the stupid 50 moves-rule where already mentioned in other threads, so you have to list other stupidities.
1st of all, the knight would be way to limited if it couldn't jump over peices. plus, the rook and bishop and queen are stronger than a knight. 2nd, a king cant checkmate another king your king would get taken 1st. 3rd, En passant was invented because the pawn shouldnt get a free pass to bypass the other pawn. 4th, your opponent should be allowed to mate yo when you are up in material because first, you need to know how to convert winning positions, plus, it gives chess beauty if you sacrifice a lot of pieces to checkmate. 5th, pawns cant move back because then, people wouldn't have much deliberation over pawn moves and if they played a bad pawn move, they'd just move it back
Oct 21, 2025
0
#78
torrubirubi wrote:
Why should a play only on the board? I mean, after a check I should be allowed to go out of the board with my King. This would prevent a lot of stalemates.
Infinte chess?
Oct 25, 2025
0
#79
torrubirubi wrote:
Why only black and white squares? And why can the bishops only move in one color?
well if there are more squares the game will only be more complex and if bishops move in other colors what's the difference between the bishop and queen?
The purpose of game rules is to contribute to an attractive game. By claiming that rules are stupid, you actually claim that chess is an unattractive game. Which makes you both a poor observer and a poor player - or a perfect player which I doubt.
Nevertheless there are some stupid rules in chess and they are stupid only because they cause confusion and thereby make the game less attractive. But I won't discuss them in this thread.