English Chess Forum

...your opponent offers a draw and your clock is running?
...if (in a time scramble) your opponent only pushes forward a pawn to the 8th rank and presses his clock?
It sounds like an easy way to gain 2 minutes for doing nothing, which is often decisive when players are down to a minute or so each. I hope to earn a lot of points!

The second counts as an illegal move - at any time - and has the penalty stated. Three such illegal promotions would lose the game .

Any penalty for the incorrect offer of a draw is up to the arbiter and would not be an automatic 2 minutes.

Is it ok to use the traditional upturned Rook to represent a Queen when promoting? What happens if both Rooks and Queen are already in play and there is no spare Queen to hand? Can you stop the clock to hunt for a piece to promote to?

Andy Price wrote:Is it ok to use the traditional upturned Rook to represent a Queen when promoting?

No.

What happens if both Rooks and Queen are already in play and there is no spare Queen to hand? Can you stop the clock to hunt for a piece to promote to?

Yes.

Is it ok to use the traditional upturned Rook to represent a Queen when promoting? What happens if both Rooks and Queen are already in play and there is no spare Queen to hand? Can you stop the clock to hunt for a piece to promote to?


Would it be ok if both players agreed to use an upturned rook?

When very short of time I assume that one can deliberately play an illegal move in order to allow your opponent to claim a two minute addition thus allowing one more time?
Am I being silly or do some players use this tactic?

David Shepherd wrote:Is it ok to use the traditional upturned Rook to represent a Queen when promoting? What happens if both Rooks and Queen are already in play and there is no spare Queen to hand? Can you stop the clock to hunt for a piece to promote to?

Would it be ok if both players agreed to use an upturned rook?

A hard arbiter might insist that the promoted piece was a rook - and the opponent might just agree with the arbiter. Jack's answer is not quite accurate. You can stop the clock TO ASK THE ARBITER TO GET THE PIECE. You shouldn't wander off yourself to find one.

John Upham wrote:When very short of time I assume that one can deliberately play an illegal move in order to allow your opponent to claim a two minute addition thus allowing one more time?
Am I being silly or do some players use this tactic?

The Laws don't say when the two minutes should be added on. In the situation described I would add it on after the time scramble if that was to the advantage of the opponent. I have added it on when the opponent requested it. I have on two occasions not added the time as I felt it would benefit the offender more than the offended. On neither occasion did the game reach the time control.

John Upham wrote:When very short of time I assume that one can deliberately play an illegal move in order to allow your opponent to claim a two minute addition thus allowing one more time?
Am I being silly or do some players use this tactic?

An arbiter may quote the preface at you, and use a more severe punishment than the one stated.

Alex McFarlane wrote:The Laws don't say when the two minutes should be added on. In the situation described I would add it on after the time scramble if that was to the advantage of the opponent. I have added it on when the opponent requested it. I have on two occasions not added the time as I felt it would benefit the offender more than the offended. On neither occasion did the game reach the time control.

It was alleged that back in the early days of digital clocks, that a ploy of less scrupulous grand masters was to deliberately play an illegal move when short of time. The idea being that the delay caused whilst the arbiter tried to remember how to add time would be to their advantage. It rather neatly turns the tables for the arbiter to wave play on and wait for flag fall or completion of the time control before adding time. That's one that might be worth adding as a tip for matches where no arbiter is present.

Alex McFarlane wrote:

David Shepherd wrote:Is it ok to use the traditional upturned Rook to represent a Queen when promoting? What happens if both Rooks and Queen are already in play and there is no spare Queen to hand? Can you stop the clock to hunt for a piece to promote to?

Would it be ok if both players agreed to use an upturned rook?

A hard arbiter might insist that the promoted piece was a rook - and the opponent might just agree with the arbiter.

I don't disagree with this, but when it's clear that both players have agreed to use an upturned rook, my practice has been to replace it with a queen and leave it at that. The use of the upturned rook is indeed traditional, but nevertheless incorrect. Putting things right but not imposing a penalty seems to me to strike the right balance.

David Sedgwick wrote: I don't disagree with this, but when it's clear that both players have agreed to use an upturned rook, my practice has been to replace it with a queen and leave it at that. The use of the upturned rook is indeed traditional, but nevertheless incorrect. Putting things right but not imposing a penalty seems to me to strike the right balance.

I agree with that. Although once I had a player promote a pawn and put a rook on the board the right way round. The next move he tried to move it as a queen! I told him it was a rook.

At the last event at which I was arbiter, a white upturned rook was used as a black queen, which confused me when I was summoned to confirm checkmate. The loser was quite happy with the arrangement...

If someone tried to claim the 2 extra minutes for the non-promotion in a league match (without arbiter present) there would probably be a huge argument... Better than not claiming the time of course!

David Sedgwick wrote: The use of the upturned rook is indeed traditional, but nevertheless incorrect.

Traditional sets only had one queen, so if you were playing at home with just the one set, there was little choice. DGT sensory sets seem to have started a practice of supplying two queens - I think I've sighted spare queens even with non-sensory sets.

So if my opponent is about to queen in the time scramble. I should remove any spare queens from his reach. In the recent british rapid play an opponent ensured all major pieces were out of my reach when one of my pawns reached the seventh rank. So I continued to move a pawn as a queen and mated him.
So my moves were illegal ! oh dear.

Paul Robson wrote:So if my opponent is about to queen in the time scramble. I should remove any spare queens from his reach.

Then just stop the clock and ask the arbiter for a queen.