Change Chess Rules?

Sort:
Martin_Stahl
NDsteve wrote:

I think everyone should do one push-up between each move...    

Or you have to do 3 burpees (or pushups) after a piece of yours is captured and before you move (after the opponent hits the clock):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1dcxMu_Zk8

ThrillerFan
glamdring27 wrote:
owltuna wrote:

An upside-down rook is fine as a queen in a skittles game. In a rated tournament it's right that it should not be allowed. And it's not idiotic, it's a reasonable convenience under the right circumstances.

That's fine, but someone stated:

"FIDE - Upside down rook is a rook."

That is what is idiotic.  People should be forced to play with their pieces the right way up if those pieces are representing themselves!

It's not like you are supposed to be cute and mis-position the pieces.  The point is that in FIDE events, a piece can NEVER "represent" a different piece.  Lipstick on a pig is lipstick on a pig.  A rook is a rook, no matter how you look at it!  Any normal human being would put it rightside up, but if your opponent is unfamiliar with FIDE rules and places a rook upside down, it is supposed to be ruled as a promotion to Rook.  Below is the rule posted by another user at another thread, and his statement in parenthesis is spot on, you placed the Rook on the board, it's a Rook.  The rules for promotion in FIDE is the moment that the new piece touches the promoted square, it's final, you can't change it.  You can touch every piece you want to off the board and are not committed, but once one of them touches the a8-square (or any of the other 15 possible squares to promote on), that piece is final, even if you haven't let go.  Therefore, and Upside-Down Rook in a FIDE-rated game is officially promoted to a Rook as the top of the Rook has touched the promotion square.

 

 

It is illegal to use an inverted rook to mean "queen" when promoting a pawn. If a promotion piece is not readily available, the player must stop the clocks and ask the arbiter for assistance. (Technically, I think an arbiter would be within his rights to rule that the player had promoted to a rook. I don't see anything in the Laws of Chess that require the base of the piece to touch the chess board!)

chyss
_Number_6 wrote:
chyss wrote:

Yes, it does need to be played out, to establish whether one side has used up an unfairly large amount of time to reach this equal position. Using more time than is available is effectively 'cheating' unless you lose by doing so.

How about stalemate or three fold?  Should the player with the most time left on their clock win?

No.