English Chess Forum

Was talking in a pub (since we are allowed now) about amusing rule mistakes you may have made while learning.

I remember a few when I was a kid playing my dad who used to be better than me but now glad to say i've overtaken him.

Bear in mind this is a kid's point of view.

1. Thought you could put your newly promoted queen anywhere. It happened cause I promoted to a queen and my dad took it. Upset by this I said "what's the point in me changing it if it just gets taken?"
dad" don't put it there then!"
"ah, didn't know you were allowed to put the new queen on any empty square" So I did for a while in future games


2. Playing my uncle and his pawn hit the 8th rank. "Can I have a rook back please?"
Thinking that you were only allowed to get a captured piece back. I expect this is quite common.

3. Uncle playing me and I had only the king left. "I win"
"i'm safe where I am"
"but you have to move so you've lost"
Turns out I was right but didn't know it.


4. Playing my dad and we had a chess clock. He has just his King left but I have a Bishop and a King. We play on to see who runs out of time and we both still think we can win if the other runs out of time.


5. Left the king in check at school and didn't notice. Opponent just takes my king, I see ah that must mean i've lost then. game over

For a while after learning the rules, I didn't think you were allowed to promote to a queen if there was already one on the board.

Perhaps you should have used the words 'a beginner' rather than 'learning'. Many experienced players are still 'learning' when it comes to the rules - I frequently see examples of players pushing a pawn to the 8th rank and pressing the clock without replacing the pawn with a piece, castling using both hands, quoting the mythical "mating material" rule, etc. etc.

Reg Clucas wrote: ↑

Thu Jun 03, 2021 1:48 pm

Perhaps you should have used the words 'a beginner' rather than 'learning'. Many experienced players are still 'learning' when it comes to the rules - I frequently see examples of players pushing a pawn to the 8th rank and pressing the clock without replacing the pawn with a piece, castling using both hands, quoting the mythical "mating material" rule, etc. etc.

Castling with both hands won't affect the game however. Not understanding that you can have a 2nd queen will (and not in your favour )

I taught myself from a book as a child. I played another child who insisted that knights move 4-2 (or 2-4), rather than 3-2 / 2-3 ... e.g. Nf4 would be a possible opening move - very disconcerting - I assumed at first that I had mis-read the book.

Andy Stoker wrote: ↑

Thu Jun 03, 2021 2:18 pm

I taught myself from a book as a child. I played another child who insisted that knights move 4-2 (or 2-4), rather than 3-2 / 2-3 ... e.g. Nf4 would be a possible opening move - very disconcerting - I assumed at first that I had mis-read the book.

i was once told that Knights cannot go backwards.

From teaching chess, I've noticed that the concept of underpromotion baffles many.

Ah - knights going backwards - I remember a "Chess Treasury of the Air" talk dealing with (humorously) the ideas that knights *had* to go forwards (eg sacrificing themselves on f7, h7 etc - and bishops could go backwards with effect (eg Bf1 in some version of the Ruy was - I think - the example given.

"I taught myself from a book as a child. I played another child who insisted that knights move 4-2 (or 2-4), rather than 3-2 / 2-3 ... e.g. Nf4 would be a possible opening move - very disconcerting - I assumed at first that I had mis-read the book."

I played such a child at primary school, so I played according to his rules against him (they were only casual games).

On numerous occasions in blitz I've had experienced players punt Pa3 to a5 against me.

The beginner lurks in all of us...

Kevin 0'Rourke >4. Playing my dad and we had a chess clock. He has just his King left but I have a Bishop and a King. We play on to see who runs out of time and we both still think we can win if the other runs out of time.<

But that was indeed true until the 1980s when K+B v bare K, or k+N or K+B v K+B of the same colour became draws. It wasn't until 1997 that the Law became impossible to win by any series of legal moves.

"On numerous occasions in blitz I've had experienced players punt Pa3 to a5 against me.

The beginner lurks in all of us..."

Hmm - or they are cheating...

MJMcCready wrote: ↑

Thu Jun 03, 2021 3:27 pm

From teaching chess, I've noticed that the concept of underpromotion baffles many.

There's still one or two rubbish computer programs around that won't let you do it.

Matt Mackenzie wrote: ↑

Thu Jun 03, 2021 1:39 pm

For a while after learning the rules, I didn't think you were allowed to promote to a queen if there was already one on the board.

I used to encounter this from time to time in the sixties, also the notion that you couldn't castle once you'd been checked. Hooper and Whyld have a brief entry in the OCC about this "Korkser" chess. I should think it's died out by now, but you never know.

Surely the most common problem is lack of understanding of the EN PASSANT rule. I certainly never teach it to beginners and often come across players who may have been playing for a year without having encountered it.