Have you ever played a board game where your opponent insists on playing outwith the regulation rules because they think one rule is silly? Infuriatingly I have an opponent who doesn't want to play the Pawn promotion rule when we play. Can you give me some good hard reasons why he should not deviate from this rule.
What alternative is there? Just let the pawn remain a pawn on the 8th line?
There are some alternative unofficial rules out there. Like the one where on has to promote to a rook at the a and hlines, to a knight at the b and g lines, a bishop at the c and f lines, and a queen (mandatory) at the d line, only at the e line one can choose into what piece one promote.
But not promote at all? Then what's the point to advance with the pawns at all?
Originally posted by pimpsandwichI'd love to come up with a lengthy post with numerous examples as to why pawn promotion is essential to the flow of the game - not to mention the arrogance involved in a person assuming he or she can improve on a game with all the history that chess has.
Your opponent is an idiot, pawn promotion is a key element in the game.
However, I can't improve on pimpsandwhich's words as an answer to your question so I won't bother trying.
Originally posted by Duffer484OK, I'll bite. I'll give you a boring, logical reason in favor of the pawn promotion rule that you can relay to your unconventional opponent. (Although I really do favor the name calling type of response. 😉
Have you ever played a board game where your opponent insists on playing outwith the regulation rules because they think one rule is silly? Infuriatingly I have an opponent who doesn't want to play the Pawn promotion rule when we play. Can you give me some good hard reasons why he should not deviate from this rule.
Many endgame positions reach a point where there aren't enough pieces on the board to effect a checkmate to the opponent. The pawn promotion rule reintroduces the possibility of a checkmate in the endgame, which increases the chance that one side will win instead of the game ending in a draw. So the pawn promotion rule increases the chance of a decisive outcome and reduces the chance of a draw.
There is a fascinating balance in chess between material and attack. Being down a pawn will most likely lead to a loss in the endgame due to promotion, but if you sac material in the middle game for an attack they have to defend before they have a chance to put that material to use. No pawn promotion means no meaningfully endgame and way more draws. Just play checkers instead if your friend can't handle chess.
It sounds like a fairly typical scenario involving a weak player who has tried to create some sort of strange variant of the game that reduces his chances of losing.
I have known people who come up with a new mad variation of the game almost every time I see them - I always tell them it is best to get good at one game before you move on to another, but I dont think they have the attention span to pull this off..
- Joined
- 18 Jan 07
- Moves
- 12477
Originally posted by Duffer484Tell that silly sod to play a dozen games of xiangqi (which doesn't have pawn promotion) and then come back and give his reasons why he should deviate from the official rules of chess, and how he will stop the result from being boring.
Have you ever played a board game where your opponent insists on playing outwith the regulation rules because they think one rule is silly? Infuriatingly I have an opponent who doesn't want to play the Pawn promotion rule when we play. Can you give me some good hard reasons why he should not deviate from this rule.
Richard
Originally posted by Duffer484Precisely what does he want to do when a pawn gets to the 8th rank? Remove it from the board?
Have you ever played a board game where your opponent insists on playing outwith the regulation rules because they think one rule is silly? Infuriatingly I have an opponent who doesn't want to play the Pawn promotion rule when we play. Can you give me some good hard reasons why he should not deviate from this rule.
Without pawn promotion most games would be draws. Once the pieces have gone a mate will likely become impossible. You wouldn't even need to worry about blockading pawns in the ending.
Why have I wasted my life answering this? It is such a silly suggestion - tell him to go play checkers instead (without the promotion there also).
When I started to play chess, my father teached me that in the openning I could move two pawns if I moved its one square each one (for example, doing a 'e3' and 'd3' move at the same time -and only in the first white move-). For years I played with that rule also with chess friends, but when I grown up I realized it was wrong. Now I can't imagine how different would be the oppening theory if this rule was true..