Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Only Chess Forum

Only Chess Forum

  1. 01 Oct '08 10:44
    the castle is the best chess piece scientifically proven
  2. 01 Oct '08 12:14
    Castle? I like the Horsey better.
  3. 01 Oct '08 16:11
    lol, sooo funny, you mean rook, taken from the Arabic/Persian word, not sure which, for chariot - Ruch, the ch is guttural as in the Scottish loch (lake). interestingly I think that the queen was originally a Vazir, a kind of high court official. most definitely a male who passed decrees and governed on behalf of the king, like Jaffar in Walt Disney Aladdin, but got changed to a queen when the game entered Europe. i have a chess set where the castles, rooks, are elephants!
  4. Standard member leisurelysloth
    Man of Steel
    01 Oct '08 16:29
    Originally posted by Sam The Sham
    Castle? I like the Horsey better.
    I like the Preachers when I have both of them.
  5. 01 Oct '08 18:08
    The Rook will never let you down.

    No matter where you put it on a clear board it will always cover 14 squares.

    All other piece (and pawns) lose some of their attacking power
    when placed on the corner or on the edge of a board.

    Before the pieces were enchanced in the 15th century the Rook
    was the most powerful piece on the board.
  6. 01 Oct '08 21:04
    True but the Queen has a minimum of 14 squares and gets better the closer to the center.
  7. 01 Oct '08 21:23
    Agreed. But the Queen is a liabilty.

    Lose a Queen for a minor piece you lose the game.
    Lose a Rook for a minor piece - you carry on playing.

    Also a Rook will defend pawns.
    If you have the mighty Queen defending pawns then you are in trouble.
    All she can do is attack.
    In a defending chain she has to give way to everything.

    Also (and if you know this don't please post the answer right away)

    What is the one thing a Queen cannot do
    that every other piece can do, including the pawn?
  8. 01 Oct '08 21:46
    Originally posted by greenpawn34
    Agreed. But the Queen is a liabilty.

    Lose a Queen for a minor piece you lose the game.
    Lose a Rook for a minor piece - you carry on playing.

    Also a Rook will defend pawns.
    If you have the mighty Queen defending pawns then you are in trouble.
    All she can do is attack.
    In a defending chain she has to give way to everything.

    Also (and if you ...[text shortened]... t is the one thing a Queen [b]cannot do

    that every other piece can do, including the pawn?[/b]
    She can't piss standing up?
  9. 01 Oct '08 22:13
    Originally posted by hamltnblue
    True but the Queen has a minimum of 14 squares and gets better the closer to the center.
    On a clear board, doesn't it have a minimum of 21?
  10. 01 Oct '08 22:15
    Originally posted by greenpawn34
    Agreed. But the Queen is a liabilty.

    Lose a Queen for a minor piece you lose the game.
    Lose a Rook for a minor piece - you carry on playing.

    Also a Rook will defend pawns.
    If you have the mighty Queen defending pawns then you are in trouble.
    All she can do is attack.
    In a defending chain she has to give way to everything.

    Also (and if you ...[text shortened]... t is the one thing a Queen [b]cannot do

    that every other piece can do, including the pawn?[/b]
    Get a divorce?
  11. 01 Oct '08 22:18
    Originally posted by tomtom232
    She can't piss standing up?
    Neither can the Queen's Rook, Queen's Bishop or Queen's Rook.

    Genuine chess question.

    What is the one thing a Queen cannot do, that every other piece (and pawn) can?
  12. 01 Oct '08 22:23
    Originally posted by greenpawn34
    Genuine chess question.

    What is the one thing a Queen cannot do, that every other piece (and pawn) can?
    Exchange itself for a piece of higher value?
  13. 01 Oct '08 22:26 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Fat Lady
    Exchange itself for a piece of higher value?
    Hmmm... well if we subscribe to the thought that the position will determine the value of the piece... then it is possible (rarely) that a knight could be more valuable than a queen.

    Edit: On the assumption of overall piece values in any position, Id say you are probably right...

    Yet, neither can the King be exchanged for a piece of greater value.
  14. 01 Oct '08 22:34
    Aha, I've just thought of a better answer - a queen move can't give discovered check.
  15. 01 Oct '08 22:55
    Originally posted by Fat Lady
    Aha, I've just thought of a better answer - a queen move can't give discovered check.
    Correct!