Why Can't I Uncastle a Castle ?

Don"t worry. This forum is filled with impatient people, so expect it LOL

Would you allow uncaptures as well? Would an e.p. uncapture be available only on the move after an e.p. capture? Would pawns promote on their back rank or would that be limited to the far rank? Would unpromotion be limited to pieces that had appeared by promotion or could you unpromote one of your original knights and promote it to a queen the move after?

All very interesting.

Nah, cause that involves putting pieces back on the board. Not quite the same. I said I thought it is probably because after u move your king/Rook, u can't castle, so since castling moves the king and Rook, u can't do a similar movement once again. What if u leave a pawn as a pawn on the 8th rank instead of promoting?

>> 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") 

Nope (art.3.7.5.1).

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 ? 

I just told you. A king or a rook  "moving back from whence it came" is not "unmoving", "retracting" or any other imaginary concept you want to dream up - it is simply a king or a rook making a legal move - by the rules - that happens to put it back where it came from.  I think you understand perfectly well why you can't uncastle. If so, and if your point is "why can't the rules be changed to allow uncastling" then go for and good luck with your efforts, but I doubt that you'll get much support because in 45 pages of discussion on the subject I haven't seen anyone but you expressing any desire to make "uncastling" a legal move. If, on the other hand your point is that you believe it is already a legal move, because it is not explicitly forbidden in the written rules, then good luck with your delusion - go for it, play an uncastling move and see how many chess opponents actually stick around to finish the game. Of course it will have to be OTB -because you can't uncastle on chess.com - or any other online chess site, because they are programmed to force play to follow those pesky "...made up conventions" aka "The rules of chess"

I think u needta go back and find out as to WHY the castling move was "invented" in the first place. Only then u will begin to understand why it got made-up in the 1st place. 

& don't start talking tuff w/ me buster. I'm good at that too u know  .

I know exactly why the castling move was "invented" (which means the same as "made-up" - so yes, if I know why it was "invented" then I already understand why it was "made-up")

Now I don't know why the "uncastling" move was not invented (or "made-up") around the same time. But as I say - if you think it's time has come then go for it. But it isn't going to happen in an online chess forum "off-topic" post no matter how many pages you spin it our for. 

And in these (now 46) pages I've seen how good you are a talking tough. It's not my intention to try to "out-tough-talk" you; I prefer to talk sense.

That would also allow the king to re-castle on the other side. How many times would you be able to in castle and recastle? I could just hop the king around to both sides indefinitely. Interesting though.

Because

I wanna have AlphaZero wired for a back-castle option to see what happens.

It'd be the best way to beta test the effort to reverse the castle move.

We needta find a way to use AZ's AI capabilities to better improve our game. Backcastling would be a very good application.

One shouldn't be 'disprivileged' from backcastling. Logic attests ! 

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.

Isn't this from Tim Crab ?....Crab's can only move sidewayz.