Pawn promotion question

[Lewis Martin]

There was one incident that I can remember a few years ago: this was in Switzerland 2008, maybe Chris will remember this too, and maybe help out here?

I cannot remember who the players were(!) and indeed the result to look up (looking through PGNs might provide a clue, but I'm not scrolling through every top board games (I seem to remember that it was on board 2) in that tournament!) but White was running low on time, and had one move to checkmate upon promoting a pawn. (Something like a White King on c6 and Black's on c8. - It might be d6 and d8, but same outcome I believe) However the problem was the following: White moved the pawn to the 8th rank, but his clock then ran out of time. Note how he didn't complete the move by placing a rook or a queen on the square (is the notion that checkmate officially ends the game and within the time limit - ergo you don't have to press the clock - correct?) but I believe he declared which piece he was going to use before he had to then remove the pawn, find the piece, and then place it on the promoted square - which takes possibly 2 seconds(?) but he was very close to completing the move.

I think that player was asking the spectators to be witness to the fact that he promoted before the clock ran out (which he did) but as mentioned he didn't complete the move by putting the piece down, despite declaring which piece to use. I couldn't say anything towards this, and walked away before being at risk of possibly being pestered by that player.

Anyone like to say what the correct outcome should be? It is a shame that two seconds in this instance decides that the game is either a win or a loss (I think there were other pieces on the board).

I'll try to remember who it was and what the actual recorded result turned out to be in the meantime! Something I ought to remember really!

[Christopher Kreuzer]

I'm afraid I can't remember who was involved in that one, Lewis. My own memories of Switzerland are rather dominated by managing to lose on time in a position where I had one more move to make to repeat a position three times and claim a draw. It was made worse by the fact that the time control used increments. Possibly increments were being used in the game you are thinking of as well? The lesson seems to be if you are short of time when promoting a pawn, stop the clock and sort things out before the clock is restarted (and if you don't know how to stop the chess clock being used, find out before starting the game!). If there are no increments, then while you wait for an arbiter or a spare queen to arrive, work out whether to try and mate (digital clocks allow such calculations, analogue clocks less so), or if you have too little time left then consider claiming a draw under 10.2 (though as more and more events now use increments, the need to know when to claim 10.2 becomes less and less).

[Alex Holowczak]

I can sense the dark hand of McFarlane behind this one. He is always thinking up ways to scam chess players.

I took part in his 2014 World Cup draw. I paid £5.00 and drew........Luton Town!

You've still got more chance of winning than if you'd drawn Scotland.

[Geoff Chandler]

Alex convinced me to pay another £5.00 for another shot. I did get Scotland!

(are you in on this as well?)

[Andrew Zigmond]

There is no such piece in chess as an upturned rook - simple as. Yes, it is quite a common convention and perfectly acceptable in friendly games. However it looks amateurish and arbiters are quite correct to step in and insist the upturned rook is replaced.

The arbiter bashers on this thread may have a point while they say there is no law in chess against an upturned rook, however neither is there anything saying that it does constitute a queen. There is the famous story of Kasparov's famous crushing of Karpov at Linares 93 - Kasparov (playing black) moved a pawn to the eighth rank to make a second queen and give check, the arbiter (stupidly) brought a second white queen at which point Kasparov lost patience and pressed his clock. Karpov promptly ignored the check and when challenged said, `That could be a black bishop on d1`. In the same way how could you argue that an upturned rook is not a third bishop or knight?

[Michael Farthing]

In the same way how could you argue that an upturned rook is not a third bishop or knight?

Perhaps because the person promoting has told you it's a queen?
Perhaps because the person promoting has not bothered to say anything on the grounds he's behaving normally (technical usage - no slur on under-promoters intended)?
Let's face it - in 99% of games players don't actually set out to be obtusely awkward.

[Ian Thompson]

... arbiters are quite correct to step in and insist the upturned rook is replaced.

The correct action would be to turn the rook the right way up and then decide whether or not to penalise the player for having put the rook on the board upside down.

[Mike Truran]

The whole thing feels like something of a First World Problem.

[Christopher Kreuzer]

... arbiters are quite correct to step in and insist the upturned rook is replaced.

The correct action would be to turn the rook the right way up and then decide whether or not to penalise the player for having put the rook on the board upside down.

I'd be tempted to put a little paper crown on the pawn with the words "THIS IS A QUEEN" on it. Seriously, quite why people seem mentally unable to get past the simple action of stopping the clock to sort things out if things turn awkward, I'm not sure. Do chess players in general have a mental block about stopping the clock while the game is in progress? If a player uses an upturned anything, the opponent is equally able to stop the clock and ask for things to be clarified.

Most of the time, the newly created promoted piece is captured and that is the end of that. How many time have people here seen a pawn pushed to the promotion square, an awkward moment when the players mentally decide whether to bother replacing the pawn with a promoted piece (depends on the exact position)[*], then the other player just captures the 'pawn' and the game continues. Strictly speaking, not 'allowed', but it happens all the time (you would hope both players would write down the same promotion on their scoresheet). Problems only really seem to arise when time trouble is involved. Maybe chess players short of time are reluctant to stop the clocks for fear of being accused of using the time to think about the position? Or maybe they are reluctant to give their opponent time to think...

[*] In the Sowray-Speelman example I mentioned above, replacing the pawn with a queen was necessary as the 'old' queen was the one that was captured and the 'new' one captured the piece capturing the 'old' queen.

[Roger de Coverly]

In the same way how could you argue that an upturned rook is not a third bishop or knight?

As illustrated by Geoff above, the "old" convention was that an upturned Rook was a second or third Queen. If you only had one chess set, there would have been little choice, unless you used a wine glass instead ( as suggested by Hartston in one of his books). Perhaps under arbiter influence, some sets come with extra queens these days.

[David Blower]

I am now reading the "guidelines for events for inexperienced players" PDF document from FIDE. It says this specifically about using an upside down rook: "Sometimes people promote to a queen and use an inverted rook for this purpose. Provided both players have condoned the action, replace the piece by a queen immediately after the next move is completed."

With the stated aim at the top of this: "One should never lose sight of the prime objective of organizing all chess events. This is that everybody involved enjoys the event as much as possible..."

Possible loophole to those saying that the correct action is to place the rook the correct way up!

A upside down rook with the opponent then immediately saying: "I adjust" and turning the rook the correct way up, is also possible.

At the end of the day the reason why I have asked about this rule is because only 2 (rather than 3) illegal moves now lose the game, so if a pawn promotion is not carried out correctly, it only leaves 1 other illegal move for the rest of the game (or if an illegal move has already being made, and the opponent is strict, an immediate loss!)

If an upside down rook is being placed on the board it would suggest that the position is clearly won for the player with the upside down rook and to lose the game because of it would seem to be a bit of a pedantic point, but those are the rules. I think we're give the advice to follow the laws to the letter, and if a 2nd queen is needed to stop the clock whilst someone gets one from another set for the player. At Brewood believe it or not we don't have 2nd queens provided for us in the sets! The same as most other chess clubs I would have thought.

[Andy McCulloch]

A couple of seasons ago I convinced my club of the need to renew our chess sets which were rather mismatched. We purchased sets with two queens of each colour. The sets are a big improvement. Much to my surprise, I find myself having to sort out the sets quite often, because some players dislike having the second queen and return them to the equipment box (or worse, put them anywhere). The most common explanation I have been given for this behaviour is that the second queen is confusing!

[Jon Mahony]

A couple of seasons ago I convinced my club of the need to renew our chess sets which were rather mismatched. We purchased sets with two queens of each colour. The sets are a big improvement. Much to my surprise, I find myself having to sort out the sets quite often, because some players dislike having the second queen and return them to the equipment box (or worse, put them anywhere). The most common explanation I have been given for this behaviour is that the second queen is confusing!

Not a problem at Leeds CC, we have 10 standard club sets with one Queen and a huge mish mash of old sets from the last 30 years slung in a carrier bag at the bottom of the box - plenty of spare Queen’s - it might be twice as big as all the other pieces on the board, a different shade of black and made out of wood, but its not an upturned rook

I think after this I’ll make a point to search out the best Queen’s in the bag and have a “Spare Queen box”

[Graham Borrowdale]

...some players dislike having the second queen and return them to the equipment box (or worse, put them anywhere). The most common explanation I have been given for this behaviour is that the second queen is confusing!

Well of course. Beginners will often determine who is winning by counting the pieces of their opponents which have been captured, rather than counting those left on the board. There is also the concept of 'getting your queen back' when you get a pawn to the other end. Things were a lot more innocent when we were beginners!

[Jon Mahony]

...some players dislike having the second queen and return them to the equipment box (or worse, put them anywhere). The most common explanation I have been given for this behaviour is that the second queen is confusing!

Well of course. Beginners will often determine who is winning by counting the pieces of their opponents which have been captured, rather than counting those left on the board. There is also the concept of 'getting your queen back' when you get a pawn to the other end. Things were a lot more innocent when we were beginners!

We have a member who has played for 45 years, and has never got above the 90 grade, I can’t count the number of times he’s marched up to me after a loss, and said in disgust, something along the lines of:

“He beat me, I should have won though, I was 2 pawns up!!!”

“Yes K… but he sacrificed them to Checkmate you…”

Always very amusing!

The same player at a rapid play a few years back, blundered his Queen during a game, only to capture his opponents queen 2 moves later with interest in the form of an extra Knight.

Said player broke the deadly silence in the playing hall to stand up, hold up his opponents captured Queen like a trophy and shout “Yeeeeeeeeeessss!!!” his opponent sealed the moment as legendary by looking up and in a totally wooden voice and saying “Your not very gracious are you?” The episode is often recounted at Leeds CC accompanied by fits of hysterics