Acceptable conduct

[Paolo Casaschi]

I guess some kind of compulsion to have the pieces exactly at the center of the board.

Ahem. Centre of its square, not the board! (visions of all the pieces crammed into the central four squares)

Ooooops, j'adoube: replace "board" with "square"

[Jonathan Bryant]

I have seen somebody doing the parlour trick of putting all 32 pieces in a column on one square.

For those that don’t believe this is possible ... there’s a photograph of Bill Hartston doing this here:-

http://www.streathambrixtonchess.blogsp ... -rest.html


I assume SR is referring to Bill, anyway. I can’t imagine two people have ever done it

[Paolo Casaschi]

I have seen somebody doing the parlour trick of putting all 32 pieces in a column on one square.

For those that don’t believe this is possible ... there’s a photograph of Bill Hartston doing this here:-http://streathambrixtonchess.blogspot.c ... -rest.html


I assume SR is referring to Bill, anyway. I can’t imagine two people have ever done it

Well, I bet you found something that Carlsen is not able to do with a chess set

[Stewart Reuben]

I had no idea that Bill could do this parlour trick. It was done by somebody in Las Vegas.

[Andy Stoker]

Oh, such disappointment ... I had this vision of a column of 32 pieces, one after another .... perhaps with the aid of chewing gum

[Dave Ewart]

... One insisted that the knights be pointed forward. The other that they be turned sideways on. ....

I noticed this during Anand v Carlsen: Anand places them pointed forward, Carlsen sideways. I don't think they ever adjusted each others pieces, though

FWIW I prefer sideways, like Carlsen, because you can see the shape of the knight more clearly when it's oriented that way! Anand might prefer the pointed forward approach because it is, psychologically-speaking, more aggressive?

[Joey Stewart]

I like forward too - feels like they are going forth to battle, not trying to run off the edge of the board away, seems cowardly to me.

Still, sideways is better then some of the weirdness you see - some players put them at an angle, facing different directions, or even backwards!

If there was a law it would be against it!

[Dave Ewart]

... some players put them [...] facing different directions

*SHUDDER* Such behaviour is either reckless indifference OR a deliberate winding up of an opponent with chronic OCD.

[Michael Farthing]

My dad taught me to point them forwards when I was five. So that must be right.

[NickFaulks]

For some years I used to keep them pointing at my opponent's king ( though not to the extent of j'adoubing when he moved it ). Not sure why I stopped doing that.

[PeterTurland]

This goes in the direction of 'Darmok' the wonderful Startrek episode, in the 'Next Generation' series, that hints at what is wrong with most of the human world, we don't understand each others metaphors.

[Ray Sayers]

I was just beginning when 'the Master Game' started on TV. I loved that as a kid.

The knights on the demo board faced left, so I always visualised knights on a board facing left and I always put mine that way since.

I have heard that the knights facing away from each other is bad luck?!

[Nick Grey]

The acceptable response to an opponent putting your pieces facing the way they want is when it is your move to put the pieces facing the way you want.

Only make this in own time.

[Paul McKeown]

knights

[Stewart Reuben]

Surely, out of courtesy, the slit of the bishop's mitre should point towards your opponent?

Amazing. Don't posters realise that the board and set is simply an aide-memoire? Chess is a purely abstract game. Or was until those new-fangled clocks came along.