Why would you want to uncastle? Castling keeps you safe or it wouldn't BE a rule, uncastling isn't a rule because it doesn't help anything.
Why Can't I Uncastle a Castle ?
Sort:
EndgameStudier wrote:
How about VERTICAL Castling? In this game:
White's next move could be 0-0-0-0. Moving the king to e3 and the rook to e2. The rules say that neither the king or rook can move. In this case the rook DIDN'T MOVE as it was promoted. For this one position they should make vertical castling legal.
It'd be castling THROUGH check, even if it was legal
It's not moving the king through check? Ke3 doesn't cross rooks path
The_Ghostess_Lola wrote:
theflyingtinman wrote:
>> It's about the word move combined w/ the ability to retract piece moves.
Trying to justify the concept of "un-castling" by stating that other pieces can retract their moves is absurd.
There is no such thing as "retracting a piece's move"
A piece may happen to move back to a square it previously occupied, if the square is available and if the move is legal - but that is just a regular "move" (by the rules), not a "retraction" (which does not exist in the rules - and which is why a pawn's ability to move only forward is stated explicitly, rather than as an exception to some non-existant concept of "retraction")
WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT PAWNS HERE !!
Why can't ppl stay on topic ?
A King CAN move back from whence it once came. A Rook can move back from whence it once came. So, tell me why someone can't uncastle for a reason outside tradition & made-up convention ?
Interesting argument
If Uncastling was legal, what would be the corresponding rules? Could you re-castle an unlimited # of times? Could you castle on one side, uncastle, and then re-castle on the other side, and vice versa? Does Castling already count as a king move, thereby making uncastling illegal cause the king moved? same applies to rook? All these have to be specified before the rule change could be considered
morethantwentycharac wrote:
It would be nice if I could undo the actions of a certain Chess.com BIGOT.
It would be nice if you could undo people from quoting your posts wouldn't it?
The problem with uncastling is how many times could you do it? Does castling count as a king move, so would uncastling be illegal than cause you've moved your king already?
Bazinga me this bazinga me that....I know I'm a brat....but lettuce uncastle & let me win w/out this hellahassle. (boy, that came out stoopid)
I'm convinced that castling is an arbitrary creation. It's been warranted outta tradition and that doesn't stand good with me. Why it morphed into what it is today ?....I'll never know.
But, I do believe that anything abitrary CAN be improved. That's why I wanna know how this move can be improved. And "because I'm used to it" doesn't work well with me....sorry.
U know, reversing the move....foxy brown.
They should make castling vertically a real thing, for this one position:
K-e3 and R-e2 0-0-0-0
....good one !
TRextastic wrote:
I mean, looking at your post history I'm not so sure you're a troll as much as you are just incompetent.
In this case you're the only incompetent one here. You are clearly showing your lack of brain cells. All of us know that you can't "uncastle" in chess because the rules don't have anything saying that we can. Yet, your incompetent self felt it was necessary showing us the proof that we can't do that. He knows that you can't do that, that is why he posted this in the first place. Go back to school kid, smh.
Glad to see that the bumping rules are being observed ! ……keep up the good work ! ….bless 🙏
ha-how ?
Why can’t I go to White Castle? … My belly is growling, I want 30 burgers… 🤷♂️
go to denny's and try the moon over my hammy.
Here is my reasoning: Castling is an option that can be delayed, or forgone in the first place. It's an optional thing. So would uncastling, but the main reason I'm getting at is it MAKES NO SENSE. It doesn't help the game except for 1 in a 1000 chance that it MAY alter the course. Plus, it would be extremely confusing. If you castle, then you Uncastle, then, some would say you could castle again because castling is counted as a king move, but in the context that you describe it, Lola, uncastling would be like taking that back. So basically you never castled. Which means your king never moved and... I think you get it. Even if that is disproved, it would still get confusing. It's like taking back a move. So you basically waste 2 moves at least! Not to mention being really annoying in games... and well, the idea is practically useless. Creative, but somewhat useless. Or overused. Either way, I cannot see how it helps the game at all.