why did the game review engine say that a pawn should’ve been promoted to a rook instead of a queen?
Sort:
I did an analysis on my latest game and the game review engine says that my opponent made a mistake by promoting his pawn to a queen instead of a rook. Why did it do this?
Check out this #chess game: KingMe-KnightKnight vs tigerslayer78 - https://www.chess.com/live/game/137807705448
What do you mean? There’s nothing a rook can do that a queen can’t.
7 days ago
0
#5
It doesn't say a rook promotion is better when I look at it. There's no reason for an underpromotion at all, either.
Sometimes you have to give it a moment; I once played a rook sac that was considered a mistake at first, but then it was brilliant when I checked again.
Edit: I looked at the wrong move. It actually says they're both equal (+M11), which makes sense, seeing as that piece has to be taken either way, meaning it doesn't really matter.
7 days ago
0
#6
Sometimes underpormoting is necessary to avoid stalemate, or to to knight to prevent a weird checkmate.
The engine likely favors the rook's defensive or strategic potential.
Did your opponent still have their queen? Maybe a rook promotion meant the engine believed you would make a different move, possibly attacking your opponent's queen and not the promoted rook, which the engine thought was in the better position. Maybe.
