Promoted Piece Not Available

[wintdoan]

8F7. Promoted piece not available.
If the desired piece is not available to replace a promoted pawn, the player may stop both clocks in order to locate that piece and place it on the board. A player who cannot quickly find such a piece may request the assistance of the director. It is common practice, however, to play using an upside-down rook for a second queen. In the absence of the player’s announcement to the contrary, an upside-down rook shall be considered a queen. It is improper to press the clock to start the opponent’s time with the pawn still on the last rank. If this is done, the opponent may immediately restart the player’s clock without moving.

As soon as the new piece is placed on the board, either player should restart the clock.

(a) Should probably note that upside-down rook=Queen is contrary to FIDE rules
(b) I have always felt that pawn to last rank, hit clock, fumble for Queen on opponent’s time is almost by definition an illegal move. (Starting the opponent’s clock with an illegal position on the board). I can’t understand how the only recourse for the opponent is to punch the clock back.
(c) We had an interesting discussion about the procedure for asking for assistance if a second Queen is not immediately available at last weekend’s State HS Sectionals. The rule is relatively clear that the player should stop the clocks only when in the process of promoting a pawn, i.e. should move the pawn to the 8th rank first. Suppose that, after asking for a Queen (with the clocks stopped—if it’s done on the players’ time, who cares?), the player realizes that p=Q stalemates and really wants to play p=R when the R has been available all along. I would tease out of the rule that if you stop the clock to request a particular piece, you are stuck with that request (“and place it on the board”), but I could see someone argue that the rule that you are only committed once the promoting piece hits the square conflicts with that.

[Smythe_Dakota]

Heh heh. I have an idea. If a player asks an arbiter to fetch a queen, the player’s clock continues to run during the fetching process. If, when the arbiter finally hands the player a queen, the player actually promotes to a queen, the player gets his lost time back, even if his time expired during the fetch. If the player promotes to another piece, or plays a non-promoting move, the player loses the time spent on the fetch, and time-forfeits if his time has run out.

Bill Smythe

[Micah_Smith]

@wintdoan

](a) Should probably note that upside-down rook=Queen is contrary to FIDE rules

In the rule itself or in a TD Tip? I don’t think mentioning it in the rule itself is appropriate. Adding it as a TD Tip, maybe.

@wintdoan

(b) I have always felt that pawn to last rank, hit clock, fumble for Queen on opponent’s time is almost by definition an illegal move. (Starting the opponent’s clock with an illegal position on the board). I can’t understand how the only recourse for the opponent is to punch the clock back.

I agree.

[wintdoan]

@Micah Smith

@wintdoan

](a) Should probably note that upside-down rook=Queen is contrary to FIDE rules

In the rule itself or in a TD Tip? I don’t think mentioning it in the rule itself is appropriate. Adding it as a TD Tip, maybe.

This is a poster child for why we would be better to have clean rules stripped of the embellishments with a completely separate section for comments on the rules. Interspersed “TD Tips”, aside from interrupting the flow of the document, are often not that at all, but actually aimed at the player more than the TD. Here, a third of the actual “rule” is describing the upside-down rook which would most charitably be described as deprecated in tournament play, if not strictly prohibited. (Fine for playing Aunt Hertha on the veranda).

[GKarRacer]

@wintdoan

Here, a third of the actual “rule” is describing the upside-down rook which would most charitably be described as deprecated in tournament play, if not strictly prohibited. (Fine for playing Aunt Hertha on the veranda).

This is still common practice and even expected, so it’s definitely not deprecated. So much so that in FIDE events a reminder in the announcements is often needed.

[wintdoan]

@GKarRacer

@wintdoan

Here, a third of the actual “rule” is describing the upside-down rook which would most charitably be described as deprecated in tournament play, if not strictly prohibited. (Fine for playing Aunt Hertha on the veranda).

This is still common practice and even expected, so it’s definitely not deprecated. So much so that in FIDE events a reminder in the announcements is often needed.

I’m not sure when I last saw a flipped over rook in a serious tournament game. Maybe that’s because IHSA uses the FIDE interpretation, and Nationals has extra Q’s all over the place. And also because second Queens are usually not long for this earth. At any rate, I don’t think an endorsement of it as a part of the actual rule is a good idea at all.

[LaughingVulcan]

@wintdoan

@Micah Smith

@wintdoan

](a) Should probably note that upside-down rook=Queen is contrary to FIDE rules

In the rule itself or in a TD Tip? I don’t think mentioning it in the rule itself is appropriate. Adding it as a TD Tip, maybe.

This is a poster child for why we would be better to have clean rules stripped of the embellishments with a completely separate section for comments on the rules. Interspersed “TD Tips”, aside from interrupting the flow of the document, are often not that at all, but actually aimed at the player more than the TD. Here, a third of the actual “rule” is describing the upside-down rook which would most charitably be described as deprecated in tournament play, if not strictly prohibited. (Fine for playing Aunt Hertha on the veranda).

Or one could accept that Aunt Hertha might want to play on the veranda in the United States and this is again yet a reason that the USCF should have different rules from FIDE and that should be allowable. (Oh, and I have indeed seen players in tournament play use upside down Rooks - not thinking they could have grabbed a Queen from the empty board next door. But the players involved were perfectly comfortable with that practice, if you want to know exceptions that prove keeping the rule.)

[dennisk]

Never mind upside-down Rooks. What I’ve been seeing more and more lately (primarily with young children) is to lay a pawn down and use it as a Queen. Other than being silly, this has the disadvantage that a pawn in that position can and will roll around, and pretty soon you don’t know which square it’s supposed to be on. At least an upside-down Rook stays where you put it.

[relyea]

I’m mindful of a local master who once (in my witnessing) used a right side up rook as a queen in a skittles game.

All shenanigans aside, like castling with two hands or writing the move before playing it, this is the sort of thing that, if strictly penalized, will only happen once. If it therefore is a pattern, the player will learn proper procedure at an inconsequential tournament (The West Eastside $5 Quads) and not suffer dire consequences at the World Youth.

Alex Relyea