Well... Sometimes you should read the rules. It is fair play.
And other times you should not!
I think it is rude for your opponent to play the Sicilian defense when you sat down intending to play the Evan's gambit. What gives him the right to choose the opening, anyway?
The OP already acknowledged he didn't know the rule, which was explained on the first reply, and moved on. I can't see why you guys need keep beating the point for 20+ posts. Just let it go.
For that matter, when I played 1 f4 e6 2 g4, intending a crushing kingside expansion, my opponent was supposed to ignore my plans and play moves like ...a6 3 h4 a5 4 g5 a4 5 h5 and so on, but he instead played Qh4 mate. How is that fair.
rnune, what rule is there to follow? How can he think he can ever mate his opponent if he is in check?
I find it natural that begginers don't grasp the idea of perpetual check being a draw, as obvious as it may be for someone who is used to the game. The idea I had when I first started playing not long ago is that the game ends with checkmate period. I still strugle with the idea that stalemate is a draw, but I am getting used to it.
That was not my point though. Chess.com community can be friendlier towards nw players, specially those, like the OP, who admit they are wrong and choose not to take a confrontational stance. The thread was over with pfren's comment, but people kept beating the dead horse. Just move on, I say.
I was in a position of clear advantage when my opponent began to repeat - for, in total, over 70-moves - the alternation of Qg4+ and Qf3+...
If your opponent had a perpetual check, then you were NOT "in a position of clear advantage". You were in a drawn position.
Let me guess...it's rude to take advantage of blunders?
I also want to complain about the rudeness of some chess players on this site. On many occassions I have been in a position of clear advantage, in some instances I was just about to mate my opponent when he has the gall to continually check me or force a stalemate or defend against my mate in some manner such as capturing my threatening piece or even to sometimes, pard me while I take a breath before continuing, mating me before I had the chance to mate him. Imagine! Unbelievable! Just terrible is what it is by golly! Goodness gracious me! What is this world coming to?
We feel for you, Frank, but be strong.
Discinnecting is rude. In fact, anyone who does it should be pun
Perpetual check is arrogance.
man, another thread on this tripe!!! Is it offside in football if the last defender is in front of the attacker when the ball is played to them? YES cos that's the rules folks!!! Why do bishops move diagonally? How come horsies can jump over other pieces afterall they are not real horsies. COS IT'S A GAME OF CHESS AND THOSE ARE THE RULES. FFS
Would you agree with or obey a law that criminalizes an ethnicity? Your argument is illogical, given the fact that the mere existence of rules doesn't imply justice.
All this considered, I understand the legitimacy of "perpetual check" because one of the primary aims of chess is to, altogether, avoid check.
We're talking about a game here, not racism or pejudice you dingbat. If you don't like the game with all it's rules then don't play it!!!
Or that it's rude to move your pieces?
Tim bits are pretty good.
I know right.