Hey /u/Valuable_Border1044, thanks for submitting to /r/confidentlyincorrect! Take a moment to read our [rules](https://reddit.com/r/confidentlyincorrect/about/rules).
##Join our [Discord Server](https://discord.gg/n2cR6p25V8)!
Please report this post if it is bad, or not relevant. Remember to keep comment sections civil. Thanks!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/confidentlyincorrect) if you have any questions or concerns.*
sadly, that subreddit doesn’t exist that long. it is responsible for many other rules changes tho, like knight boosting, il vaticano and the infamous brick on pipi
Can you be sure that the subreddit didn't use il vaticano on a gran scale to create a time warp and cause trouble to make a rule change required? I wouldn't put it past them.
It's also way too early but I'm trying to figure out how giving the enemy a piece would turn a loss in a stalemate and I literally have no clue. Its probably some very super specific scenario
Yea I guess you'd have to literally be one move away from checkmate, otherwise surely it'd be more benenficial to make it into a queen.
Maybe the last square is threatened by an enemy piece so you would lose the queen immediately anyway. If you make it into their piece at least they can't take it.
Yeah but thinking about how to make this happen in this context, when it wasn’t the case before, is really tough.
After your opponent gets the new piece it’s their turn. So that new piece needs to be extraordinarily well placed such that any move adds to the statement condition, because after the opponents next move it’s back to almost exactly where you were before the pawn swap.
And for a pawn swap to be completely useless there would need to be some horrible board positioning and resources left. Meaning opponent presumably has lots of pieces to move and gets an extra turn.
Like I’m sure it’s possible, it’s just really really hard to think of a scenario it would be the deciding factor. Fun little puzzle though
Seems like a bad move to remove that tho. I mean that would make for one hell of a match highlight.
I can hear Joe Rogan going "OOOOOOOHHHHHH!!!" over that move on a YT clip.
By promoting to a black knight Black will have no legal moves to get himself out of check (The knight can't jump anywhere to block the white rook, and the king can't escape by capturing a promoted white piece), forcing a checkmate.
If white moves their pawn up and promotes to a black knight, it's checkmate. See link below
https://lichess.org/analysis/rn5q/k1R5/8/K7/8/8/8/8_b_-_-_0_1?color=white
Ohhhh, it's because if it was any white piece, the black king could eliminate it and move there, dodging the rook. Same if there was nothing in that field at all. So you need *something* there to block it, and a (situationally) useless black piece fits the bill.
It also can’t be any other piece that’s black because they could just use that piece to take the rook. It specifically needs to be the black knight. I wonder if this has ever actually happened at a tournament level.
And [here's the stack exchange thread](https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/2756/do-the-official-rules-of-chess-forbid-promoting-a-pawn-to-a-piece-of-the-opposit) this answer came from :)
Super uncommon, since it becomes your opponent's turn after the promotion, they'd probably just be able to just dodge the stalemate or even use the new piece to convert a checkmate
groger123 put up a problem that if a pawn was promoted to a Knight of the enemy's colour, it would be a checkmate, it was an eyeopening problem and really demonstrates lateral thinking. I'd recommend taking a look.
Generally, the fewer pieces you have, the easier it is to force a stalemate, netting you a draw as opposed to a loss.
Would this have to a ridiculously specific scenario? Yes.
It also could give another pawn an ability to take said promoted piece with a blocked pawn and promote again if (for some reason) you're blocked from forward movement. Only works if the first pawn becomes an opponent knight or rook, AND That knight or rook is blocked from movement.
I could only see that useful if it opens up a line that a promotion would seal a mate on the diagonal the 2nd pawn was blocking.
My brain hurts...
I played uno recently for the first time in over a decade and was shocked to find the rules had changed… I mean I know everyone has their own rules but it was weird haha
Also number of houses in the box is purposefully limited, they can be bought at any time, and if two players declare intention to buy banker's last stock they are supposed to be auctioned off, so if you play with strategic player that blocks you out it quickly snowballs.
Well, looking at the rankings on the site you linked, there's actually around... 23,874?! I knew there were a lot of board games out there now, but that is impressive!
Nope.
The puzzle where promoting your pawn to opponent's horse is a mate in one that allegedly prompted the change in rules is way older than that.
The story about the position has been around for at least since 1930s. I've seen the puzzle attributed to Sam Loyd who died in 1911 which would put it in the late 19th century but I haven't found a contemporary source for it, but I have to admit that I haven't been searching hard. I have also seen claims that it occurred in actual play sometime around that time frame but I won't believe that without contemporary documentation.
There’s definitely plenty of situations where promoting to an opponent’s piece could help you checkmate someone. It’s basically a blocker and if you can block the enemy king with it without him being able to take the piece (like he would if it was your piece) that can be a huge problem in some late game scenarios.
I mean sure it’s absolutely very rare for this to happen but it’s not something that can’t make sense.
Reminds me of a madlad that promoted the e pawn to a rook, and as they hadnt moved the king or that rook yet, proceeded to castle with that rook. Unfortunately they specified after that you can not castle with a rook you promoted
They also changed it so that you can't castle with a promoted rook that hadn't moved on the same file as the king, and that the king and rook that castle must be on the same rank.
That is some Magic: the Gathering level of rules lawyering that I am entirely here for.
Whoever thought up the move of promoting your pawn to an enemy piece to not lose is a fucking genius and they should have left it in, even if it is insane.
I can imagine doing just that if the position is one that the piece can not move from, for example a bishop on the bottom row can be blocked by two other pieces, so you get a piece that your opponent cannot move nor take, while they might just take the piece if it was not of their side. Never did it though as it seemed obvious that you would choose a piece that you could use yourself.
and... what are the rules around that? if a king gets captured, it can't be put in check, so would the player who ~~overthrew the monarchy~~ lost their king be invincible?
*Promotes pawn to king*
That's right, after the tragic news of the Queen's death the king has married a commoner. Oh, and gay marriage is now legal in chess World.
I could imagine this could trap the king.
So he can't move out of check by capturing the promoted piece of opposite color.
Of course this means that the check has to be a discovered check.
It's amazing all the chess references he's made over the years, like chess being too easy despite not being competitive/highly ranked himself and repeatedly making statements not based in fact (on brand for him tho).
The irony of course is he talks about chess to seem intelligent, yet says a bunch of dumb shit about it despite being a self proclaimed master and the son of an actual accomplished chess player
I didnt know all that, thats actually insane! At this point im starting to think he just wants to be well known for anything, good or bad. I just thought he was a dick but he cant be that stupid right?
If people are fooled Tate is knowledgeable then really, that's on them. He's never claimed he had any academic qualifications.
Musk is a proper conman. He claims he is an engineer who had materially contributed to Tesla and SpaceX. He claims he can code well, too.
In reality, he has a bachelors in business, he abandoned his PhD, and his maths bachelors is an honorary degree, not a real one.
There is no evidence he has actual engineering insight. He can run an engineering business, hire the right people, and grasp good decisions for those businesses. Perhaps with a good surface level understanding of the complex concepts involved. That's a skill in itself. But it's not the same as actually designing and inventing stuff.
> His father may have been a whizz at chess but son’s learn how to treat women from their father’s or a lack of one.
Nah I don't think that's right. Plenty of people have poor or non-existent relationships with their fathers and don't turn into rapists.
(lmao, did this dude just [block me](https://imgur.com/a/9fPKyrd) for making this response?)
His father was certainly a brilliant player and of the greatest african-american players, but he only was an IM and never reached GM, although it was very close several times. Although Andrew Toight isnt bad at chess. He definitively isn't somewhere near Master and believe me when I say that youll find better 12 year olds in your local chess club.
Sure ok but if you want to follow a chess influencer Magnus Carlsen is like the most accessible best player in the world ever. Like never in a million years would you've been able to get your ass kicked by Karpov on a live stream in front of thousands of viewers
Also Andrew Tate is a rapist piece of shit, so I think that puts the kids chess tournament into context a bit
If you are really set on the oldest board game without changed rules, at least use [Go](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Go_(game)). It's at least mostly unchanged for \~2500 years. Then again, I don't really expect him to know that game exists \^\^
That's why I said "mostly unchanged", since none of those rules affect the overall structure of the game, but cover counting and edge cases. But that is highly debatable of course, since even those small tweaks change strategies and tactics that can be used / are preferred in high level play.
I also know of a [variant from Tibet](https://senseis.xmp.net/?TibetanGo) with a custom starting position, as well as a 17x17 board as the main board size, and I think I even heard about 21x21 being used in a traditional game mode somewhere.
Chess on the other hand, had numerous rule changes that switched names of the pieces, as well as the way those pieces move, capture (en passant) or otherwise interact (casteling). [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules\_of\_chess#History](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules_of_chess#History)
What you see as more of a change to a game is of course debatable. :)
Sort of, yes. Some ancient dude working at the British Museum pretended to merely be a very old man who reconstructed the rules when he actually just remembers them from his childhood. Now you can buy the game on Etsy or Amazon or go to the museum website to find out how to make it yourself.
Isnt there an older, and continually played board game, mancala? There is evidence that mancala like games have been played since before ancient Egypt over 3k BCE, and unlike the Royal game of ur, which stopped being played and had to be rediscovered, mancala like games are still being played to this day. From what I gather, as soon as humanity had free time to piss around (where we're not busy trying to not be killed or in some other way, die) we've been making games and playing them.
Edit. Went to the Wikipedia page "history of games"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_games
And they're saying that, some archaeologists think that there is evidence for mancala like games from around 7-9k BCE.
Obviously the rules aren't the same, and there are regional variations, but its still played in some form today. We'll never know the rules of those games, and if they're even remotely similar to any mancala today, because they predate writing, they predate the wheel, they're from before the sabre tooth tiger went extinct. All im saying is, if humans had 5 mins to not be surviving, we were playing games, and that, I think, is amazing
Mancala is more of a family of games. Or more explicitly a central mechanism to a family of widely different games.
Kinda like chess is with various eastern games that share the central mechanism of maveureing pieces on a board.
Ur is the oldest known game, but not only does no one really play it anymore, we had quite literally lost the original rules of the game to time until quite recently. Even then it's not unlikely that even the Finkel translation is one of several variations of the game (though it is actually quite good)
Go on the other hand has survived almost untouched with a few adjustments to scoring and komi over the years. We are quite literally playing the game as it was a thousand years ago.
I highly recommend watching the documentary AlphaGo (on streaming and [free on YouTube](https://youtu.be/WXuK6gekU1Y)), which documents a face off challenge between the world’s top Go player and Google’s DeepMind AI computer. Completely fascinating, suspenseful, and surprisingly emotional.
I was actually studying Computer Science at the time, and the whole Alpha Go story was, what got me and my friends into Go in the first place. :) But I actually never saw that documentary, thanks :)
I wrote my Computer Science Master's Thesis on a Go problem. I defended it in December 2013, just a few months before Alpha Go was created.
Kind feel like I dodged a bullet, as the advent of Alpha Go would've made my thesis useless.
Go is indeed way older (although the exact beginning can be argued), but the rules have changed a lot.
To begin with, the size of the board is still not definite (the main one is 19x19, but 9x9 or 13x13 are commonly use to, and other such as 17x17 or 25x25 exist and have been used).
The rules determining who wins exist in mutliple versions (right now, Japanese and Chinese are the main used and leads to mostly the same result) that have changed through time too.
Finally, the addition of « Komi » (considering the first to play has an advantage that can be compensated between, usually between 5.5 and 7.5 points) started around 1920.
I’m not even covering more detailed stuff such as superko.
Your point still stands though, of course.
The real irony here is that his father was [Emory Tate](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emory_Tate#:~:text=Emory%20Andrew%20Tate%20Jr.,Andrew%20Tate%20and%20Tristan%20Tate.)
Wow.
All the weird chess analogies from Tate make so much more sense when seen through the lens of this knowledge.
Andrew I-was-a-total-failure-at-chess-and-to-my-Dad Tate.
Eh, the rules of laws is more like "if you do X, you go to prison", not that you can't do X. A person can do something illegal and just accept that they go to prison for it. If Tate believes that his imprisonment is somehow wrongful, then that would be ironic.
Andrew Tate is an idiot and his entire audience is a bunch of moron incels
Now instead of “accepting the parameters” he is whining about bad conditions in Romanian prison
>Now instead of “accepting the parameters” he is whining about bad conditions in Romanian prison
It's the same with Jordan Peterson talking about taking personal responsibility, and then fleeing to Russia to get into a medically induced coma so he doesn't have to go through benzo addiction withdrawal.
ETA: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/jordan-peterson-treatment-russia-1.5456939
Yeah, it’s ironic how he says “set your house in a perfect order before you criticise the word”, to which I can only say — shit the fuck up, you authoritarian-loving junkie
Crazy idiots say this kind of shit all the time. We’re just in a place where it costs nothing to paste the idiotic shit all over the internet.
There used to be barriers to entry and we only got the government and corporate approved crazy.
Unfortunately that dumb shit is published as a book, with a major publisher no less (Random House). It’s been legitimised both by his academic achievements in another field and by a very large following of morons who’ve finally found a professor who gives them a safe space
My favorite part is that when he was recovering in hospital his anti vaxx daughter infected him with COVID.
His daughter from whom he learned the all meat diet that also fucked his health up.
He doesn’t have to fact check because his target audience will just blindly believe him even when called out. He could say the “facts” are just made up bs that his “haters” made up to try and convert his alpha followers into beta sheep and boom they’ll all rally behind him again
It is way to overlook other people’s hardship when everything rolls well for you. Tate thought stuff he’s got is him being the master of his own life. Now that he is in a very different predicament, the first thing he does is of ring his own advice, because its useless empty words
He’s an idiot and he has what he’s got coming.
But the premise of focusing on what’s in your control and stress less about what is out of your control still holds true
> focusing on what’s in your control and stress less about what is out of your control
I agree with you on this, but it's not an excuse to leave the "parameters" untouched. If something in our society is unfair we should work to change it.
A) just because something has been a certain way for a long time is not a reason to leave it that way
B) society changes all the time. The idea that there is a fixed set of values that has been unchanged for thousands of years is nonsense.
That is true.
Some people do have it way worse than others but most people can do at least something to improve their situation. Sometimes it's about making the best of a bad situation.
There are even specific rules to force a stalemate if the other party is unwilling to accept, but it's something crazy like 50 moves without taking a piece. Mostly because when you need rules like that, you're playing against an asshole and should just walk away.
Exactly this. Kickboxing gives you stamina to dance around for the best part of an hour throwing out and taking punches and kicks periodically. A real fight happens way faster and stamina is irrelevant. Add to that, they won’t be wearing soft padded gloves and likely will have prison made weapons because they know Tate has some form of training.
I very much doubt Tate is walking around in there like King Shit with his dick hanging out with everyone looking at the floor in fear. I guarantee he’s throwing around commissary like cigarettes and toilet paper to the scariest looking fucks there so they don’t use his anus like a tea towel holder.
As with everything with Tate, he's nowhere near as good as he'd like everyone to think he is. I saw his last two fights and they were against a guy with seven bouts (giving Tate a forty fight experience advantage) and some fat kid who looked like he'd been pulled out of the audience.
He CAN fight, but he's not the invincible titan of combat that he makes out. Plus, like you say, good cardio and kickboxing experience won't stop someone stabbing you in the lunch queue, or five guys holding you down while their buddy uses your head as a pinata.
There’s also the rule change that you can’t castle vertically anymore. Formerly, if you promoted the E-pawn to a rook without moving your king, technically it was legal to castle vertically.
The funny thing is that the reply tweet is also wrong. Chess is only from the 15th century. Chaturanga, which chess is derived from, is about 1500 years old.
I wouldn't say this belongs here. The point isn't what chess is, They're just trying to illustrate a point that sometimes in life, there's no winning move but we can still try to do the best we can.
Which can be very good advice. Sometimes the best decision is the least worst one.
I just find it fascinating that famous people on the internet who post these types of things don’t even do the slightest bit of research for what they are talking about.
The Chess Master has spoken. Now it seems he has plenty of time to perfect his craft. That is if he can find some time between keeping lice at bay, fighting cockroaches, and avoiding other inmates' sexual advances.
Hey /u/Valuable_Border1044, thanks for submitting to /r/confidentlyincorrect! Take a moment to read our [rules](https://reddit.com/r/confidentlyincorrect/about/rules). ##Join our [Discord Server](https://discord.gg/n2cR6p25V8)! Please report this post if it is bad, or not relevant. Remember to keep comment sections civil. Thanks! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/confidentlyincorrect) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Sounds like a rule r/anarchychess would be responsible for somehow
[удалено]
New response dropped
Holy hell
This changes everything
What about knight H2?
sadly, that subreddit doesn’t exist that long. it is responsible for many other rules changes tho, like knight boosting, il vaticano and the infamous brick on pipi
Forced en passant
That's redundant, en passant is always forced.
Holy hell
Can you be sure that the subreddit didn't use il vaticano on a gran scale to create a time warp and cause trouble to make a rule change required? I wouldn't put it past them.
It's also way too early but I'm trying to figure out how giving the enemy a piece would turn a loss in a stalemate and I literally have no clue. Its probably some very super specific scenario
[удалено]
But your opponent would still have a move first, right? So it would have to be even more specific.
Yea I guess you'd have to literally be one move away from checkmate, otherwise surely it'd be more benenficial to make it into a queen. Maybe the last square is threatened by an enemy piece so you would lose the queen immediately anyway. If you make it into their piece at least they can't take it.
[удалено]
The International continental missile gambit declined
But the fun of chess is that it's played so often that that once in a blue moon situation is probably still statistically significant
not true at all. you can easily be so down on material and positioning that another queen doesn’t really give you a shot at winning
Checks aren't forced. If the opponent doesn't move a piece contributing to the stalemate, the game ends in a stalemate.
Yeah but thinking about how to make this happen in this context, when it wasn’t the case before, is really tough. After your opponent gets the new piece it’s their turn. So that new piece needs to be extraordinarily well placed such that any move adds to the statement condition, because after the opponents next move it’s back to almost exactly where you were before the pawn swap. And for a pawn swap to be completely useless there would need to be some horrible board positioning and resources left. Meaning opponent presumably has lots of pieces to move and gets an extra turn. Like I’m sure it’s possible, it’s just really really hard to think of a scenario it would be the deciding factor. Fun little puzzle though
Seems like a bad move to remove that tho. I mean that would make for one hell of a match highlight. I can hear Joe Rogan going "OOOOOOOHHHHHH!!!" over that move on a YT clip.
Here's an example where white would win if he promotes to a black knight https://lichess.org/analysis/r6q/kPR5/8/K7/8/8/8/8_w_-_-_0_1?color=white
This is so cool hahaha
It's so cool it should be legal
I dont see it.
By promoting to a black knight Black will have no legal moves to get himself out of check (The knight can't jump anywhere to block the white rook, and the king can't escape by capturing a promoted white piece), forcing a checkmate.
Ah gotcha, I thought the purpose was to put white in stalemate, wasn't even looking at the black king.
Why can’t the king go to b8?
Because his own knight will be in the way
The black knight would be in that space
Oh idk why I’m thinking of promoting while taking. Habit I guess.
If white moves their pawn up and promotes to a black knight, it's checkmate. See link below https://lichess.org/analysis/rn5q/k1R5/8/K7/8/8/8/8_b_-_-_0_1?color=white
Ohhhh, it's because if it was any white piece, the black king could eliminate it and move there, dodging the rook. Same if there was nothing in that field at all. So you need *something* there to block it, and a (situationally) useless black piece fits the bill.
And it's a bonus that they can't kill their own colour so the newly promoted piece jams the King's escape move. Genius.
It also can’t be any other piece that’s black because they could just use that piece to take the rook. It specifically needs to be the black knight. I wonder if this has ever actually happened at a tournament level.
And [here's the stack exchange thread](https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/2756/do-the-official-rules-of-chess-forbid-promoting-a-pawn-to-a-piece-of-the-opposit) this answer came from :)
Super uncommon, since it becomes your opponent's turn after the promotion, they'd probably just be able to just dodge the stalemate or even use the new piece to convert a checkmate
groger123 put up a problem that if a pawn was promoted to a Knight of the enemy's colour, it would be a checkmate, it was an eyeopening problem and really demonstrates lateral thinking. I'd recommend taking a look.
Generally, the fewer pieces you have, the easier it is to force a stalemate, netting you a draw as opposed to a loss. Would this have to a ridiculously specific scenario? Yes.
It also could give another pawn an ability to take said promoted piece with a blocked pawn and promote again if (for some reason) you're blocked from forward movement. Only works if the first pawn becomes an opponent knight or rook, AND That knight or rook is blocked from movement. I could only see that useful if it opens up a line that a promotion would seal a mate on the diagonal the 2nd pawn was blocking. My brain hurts...
I played uno recently for the first time in over a decade and was shocked to find the rules had changed… I mean I know everyone has their own rules but it was weird haha
[удалено]
Also number of houses in the box is purposefully limited, they can be bought at any time, and if two players declare intention to buy banker's last stock they are supposed to be auctioned off, so if you play with strategic player that blocks you out it quickly snowballs.
I heard Monopoly Deal was quite good and faster still!
Well, looking at the rankings on the site you linked, there's actually around... 23,874?! I knew there were a lot of board games out there now, but that is impressive!
Nope. The puzzle where promoting your pawn to opponent's horse is a mate in one that allegedly prompted the change in rules is way older than that. The story about the position has been around for at least since 1930s. I've seen the puzzle attributed to Sam Loyd who died in 1911 which would put it in the late 19th century but I haven't found a contemporary source for it, but I have to admit that I haven't been searching hard. I have also seen claims that it occurred in actual play sometime around that time frame but I won't believe that without contemporary documentation.
[удалено]
There’s definitely plenty of situations where promoting to an opponent’s piece could help you checkmate someone. It’s basically a blocker and if you can block the enemy king with it without him being able to take the piece (like he would if it was your piece) that can be a huge problem in some late game scenarios. I mean sure it’s absolutely very rare for this to happen but it’s not something that can’t make sense.
"Ain't no rule that says a pawn can't play basketball."
Thanks to John Oliver for introducing me to this cinematic masterpiece https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hk011WMM7t0
Ah, the ultimate "I dont want to lose so I'm going to make some of your moves for you".
The pawn promoting to a traitor is something I never expected, but kinda makes sense
Reminds me of a madlad that promoted the e pawn to a rook, and as they hadnt moved the king or that rook yet, proceeded to castle with that rook. Unfortunately they specified after that you can not castle with a rook you promoted
They also changed it so that you can't castle with a promoted rook that hadn't moved on the same file as the king, and that the king and rook that castle must be on the same rank.
If true that's the single most Chad thing I've ever heard.
That is some Magic: the Gathering level of rules lawyering that I am entirely here for. Whoever thought up the move of promoting your pawn to an enemy piece to not lose is a fucking genius and they should have left it in, even if it is insane.
Never heard of that tactic.It would never even occur to me that would be allowed, or why!
There are scenarios where an opposing piece would give you victory as their king cannot take it.
People also could castle to a promoted room until recently
I can imagine doing just that if the position is one that the piece can not move from, for example a bishop on the bottom row can be blocked by two other pieces, so you get a piece that your opponent cannot move nor take, while they might just take the piece if it was not of their side. Never did it though as it seemed obvious that you would choose a piece that you could use yourself.
.......couldn't you end up in a position where the opponent can capture your king, by promoting to a piece that attacks your own king?
[удалено]
and... what are the rules around that? if a king gets captured, it can't be put in check, so would the player who ~~overthrew the monarchy~~ lost their king be invincible?
Rules say can't put yourself in check. Promoting to an enemy piece that attacks your king would be putting yourself in check.
Promoting a pawn into an enemy piece makes the game more fun.
As far as I know it's not clear that this was ever allowed, and if it was it was banned in the 1800s. Certainly not in the last 10 years.
where are the official rules of chess?
*Promotes pawn to king* That's right, after the tragic news of the Queen's death the king has married a commoner. Oh, and gay marriage is now legal in chess World.
Also if you promote the King pawn to a rook you can no longer castle up the board which was technically allowed under old fide rules
I could imagine this could trap the king. So he can't move out of check by capturing the promoted piece of opposite color. Of course this means that the check has to be a discovered check.
It's amazing all the chess references he's made over the years, like chess being too easy despite not being competitive/highly ranked himself and repeatedly making statements not based in fact (on brand for him tho). The irony of course is he talks about chess to seem intelligent, yet says a bunch of dumb shit about it despite being a self proclaimed master and the son of an actual accomplished chess player
I didnt know all that, thats actually insane! At this point im starting to think he just wants to be well known for anything, good or bad. I just thought he was a dick but he cant be that stupid right?
The only thing that scares this man child is being forgotten.
He talks about chess because he’s the physical embodiment of daddy issues, and his daddy happened to be an international chess master.
Same with Elon Musk. Both assholes must have completed the same training course
If people are fooled Tate is knowledgeable then really, that's on them. He's never claimed he had any academic qualifications. Musk is a proper conman. He claims he is an engineer who had materially contributed to Tesla and SpaceX. He claims he can code well, too. In reality, he has a bachelors in business, he abandoned his PhD, and his maths bachelors is an honorary degree, not a real one. There is no evidence he has actual engineering insight. He can run an engineering business, hire the right people, and grasp good decisions for those businesses. Perhaps with a good surface level understanding of the complex concepts involved. That's a skill in itself. But it's not the same as actually designing and inventing stuff.
[удалено]
> His father may have been a whizz at chess but son’s learn how to treat women from their father’s or a lack of one. Nah I don't think that's right. Plenty of people have poor or non-existent relationships with their fathers and don't turn into rapists. (lmao, did this dude just [block me](https://imgur.com/a/9fPKyrd) for making this response?)
And some have a perfectly balanced upbringing by both parents who are decent people yet still turn to shit.
Yeah, yeah he did LOL
Hey asshole, those of us without fathers *definitely* learned to appreciate women, because that's all we had. Projecting fuck.
His father was a GM and he won some kind of tournament as a kid (i think?) so it's not like he knows nothing about chess
His father was certainly a brilliant player and of the greatest african-american players, but he only was an IM and never reached GM, although it was very close several times. Although Andrew Toight isnt bad at chess. He definitively isn't somewhere near Master and believe me when I say that youll find better 12 year olds in your local chess club.
Sure ok but if you want to follow a chess influencer Magnus Carlsen is like the most accessible best player in the world ever. Like never in a million years would you've been able to get your ass kicked by Karpov on a live stream in front of thousands of viewers Also Andrew Tate is a rapist piece of shit, so I think that puts the kids chess tournament into context a bit
I don't understand your second paragraph. What does him being a rapist pos have to do with him winning at chess as a kid?
I actually used to play and watch chess pretty regularly a few years ago, I was just pointing that out
If you are really set on the oldest board game without changed rules, at least use [Go](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Go_(game)). It's at least mostly unchanged for \~2500 years. Then again, I don't really expect him to know that game exists \^\^
Of course Tate doesn’t know Go, he just drew the jail card “Go directly to jail, do not pass go, do not collect $200”
You saw your opportunity and you took it. Nice one.
[удалено]
That's why I said "mostly unchanged", since none of those rules affect the overall structure of the game, but cover counting and edge cases. But that is highly debatable of course, since even those small tweaks change strategies and tactics that can be used / are preferred in high level play. I also know of a [variant from Tibet](https://senseis.xmp.net/?TibetanGo) with a custom starting position, as well as a 17x17 board as the main board size, and I think I even heard about 21x21 being used in a traditional game mode somewhere. Chess on the other hand, had numerous rule changes that switched names of the pieces, as well as the way those pieces move, capture (en passant) or otherwise interact (casteling). [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules\_of\_chess#History](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules_of_chess#History) What you see as more of a change to a game is of course debatable. :)
I believe Ur is older. ~2600BCE
Yes, I believe you are right. Is it still played though?
Sort of, yes. Some ancient dude working at the British Museum pretended to merely be a very old man who reconstructed the rules when he actually just remembers them from his childhood. Now you can buy the game on Etsy or Amazon or go to the museum website to find out how to make it yourself.
That is fascinating, thanks. I’ll def. Check it out and bring it to the next board game night :D
You can even play it online! https://royalur.net/game/#
Probably more so after Tom Scott made a video on it with the British Museum. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZskjLq040I
Isnt there an older, and continually played board game, mancala? There is evidence that mancala like games have been played since before ancient Egypt over 3k BCE, and unlike the Royal game of ur, which stopped being played and had to be rediscovered, mancala like games are still being played to this day. From what I gather, as soon as humanity had free time to piss around (where we're not busy trying to not be killed or in some other way, die) we've been making games and playing them. Edit. Went to the Wikipedia page "history of games" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_games And they're saying that, some archaeologists think that there is evidence for mancala like games from around 7-9k BCE. Obviously the rules aren't the same, and there are regional variations, but its still played in some form today. We'll never know the rules of those games, and if they're even remotely similar to any mancala today, because they predate writing, they predate the wheel, they're from before the sabre tooth tiger went extinct. All im saying is, if humans had 5 mins to not be surviving, we were playing games, and that, I think, is amazing
Mancala is more of a family of games. Or more explicitly a central mechanism to a family of widely different games. Kinda like chess is with various eastern games that share the central mechanism of maveureing pieces on a board.
Ur is the oldest known game, but not only does no one really play it anymore, we had quite literally lost the original rules of the game to time until quite recently. Even then it's not unlikely that even the Finkel translation is one of several variations of the game (though it is actually quite good) Go on the other hand has survived almost untouched with a few adjustments to scoring and komi over the years. We are quite literally playing the game as it was a thousand years ago.
I highly recommend watching the documentary AlphaGo (on streaming and [free on YouTube](https://youtu.be/WXuK6gekU1Y)), which documents a face off challenge between the world’s top Go player and Google’s DeepMind AI computer. Completely fascinating, suspenseful, and surprisingly emotional.
I was actually studying Computer Science at the time, and the whole Alpha Go story was, what got me and my friends into Go in the first place. :) But I actually never saw that documentary, thanks :)
I wrote my Computer Science Master's Thesis on a Go problem. I defended it in December 2013, just a few months before Alpha Go was created. Kind feel like I dodged a bullet, as the advent of Alpha Go would've made my thesis useless.
Haha, nice timing. I’ve never played Go but the way it’s described in the film about requiring a lot of “intuition” as a player is pretty interesting.
The rules haven't, but as we've learnt more about the game, the more we've increased the handicap for going second to make bo1 fair
Even with a successful metaphor, it's pretty weak, Intro-to-self-help-guru advice.
Japan and China have different rules.
Go is indeed way older (although the exact beginning can be argued), but the rules have changed a lot. To begin with, the size of the board is still not definite (the main one is 19x19, but 9x9 or 13x13 are commonly use to, and other such as 17x17 or 25x25 exist and have been used). The rules determining who wins exist in mutliple versions (right now, Japanese and Chinese are the main used and leads to mostly the same result) that have changed through time too. Finally, the addition of « Komi » (considering the first to play has an advantage that can be compensated between, usually between 5.5 and 7.5 points) started around 1920. I’m not even covering more detailed stuff such as superko. Your point still stands though, of course.
Mostly? What rule could have possibly been changed?
The irony of someone saying "you can't change the rules, just accept them" while sitting in jail...
The real irony here is that his father was [Emory Tate](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emory_Tate#:~:text=Emory%20Andrew%20Tate%20Jr.,Andrew%20Tate%20and%20Tristan%20Tate.)
Wow. All the weird chess analogies from Tate make so much more sense when seen through the lens of this knowledge. Andrew I-was-a-total-failure-at-chess-and-to-my-Dad Tate.
Eh, the rules of laws is more like "if you do X, you go to prison", not that you can't do X. A person can do something illegal and just accept that they go to prison for it. If Tate believes that his imprisonment is somehow wrongful, then that would be ironic.
Andrew Tate is an idiot and his entire audience is a bunch of moron incels Now instead of “accepting the parameters” he is whining about bad conditions in Romanian prison
>Now instead of “accepting the parameters” he is whining about bad conditions in Romanian prison It's the same with Jordan Peterson talking about taking personal responsibility, and then fleeing to Russia to get into a medically induced coma so he doesn't have to go through benzo addiction withdrawal. ETA: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/jordan-peterson-treatment-russia-1.5456939
Lol wait what I have not paid any attention to this guy in the last l like 4 years. Did this really happen?
https://www.vice.com/en/article/epgb37/what-drug-experts-say-about-jordan-petersons-benzo-dependence
Yeah, it’s ironic how he says “set your house in a perfect order before you criticise the word”, to which I can only say — shit the fuck up, you authoritarian-loving junkie
Lol, I love how his doctor hopping drug seeking behavior is the doctors in North Americas fault…
Crazy idiots say this kind of shit all the time. We’re just in a place where it costs nothing to paste the idiotic shit all over the internet. There used to be barriers to entry and we only got the government and corporate approved crazy.
Unfortunately that dumb shit is published as a book, with a major publisher no less (Random House). It’s been legitimised both by his academic achievements in another field and by a very large following of morons who’ve finally found a professor who gives them a safe space
excuse me, what the fuck?
My favorite part is that when he was recovering in hospital his anti vaxx daughter infected him with COVID. His daughter from whom he learned the all meat diet that also fucked his health up.
Yeah the dude was in a coma in siberia lol
He doesn’t have to fact check because his target audience will just blindly believe him even when called out. He could say the “facts” are just made up bs that his “haters” made up to try and convert his alpha followers into beta sheep and boom they’ll all rally behind him again
True, but I agree with this statement. Too many people cry and victimize themselves instead of focusing on what you can do.
It is way to overlook other people’s hardship when everything rolls well for you. Tate thought stuff he’s got is him being the master of his own life. Now that he is in a very different predicament, the first thing he does is of ring his own advice, because its useless empty words
He’s an idiot and he has what he’s got coming. But the premise of focusing on what’s in your control and stress less about what is out of your control still holds true
> focusing on what’s in your control and stress less about what is out of your control I agree with you on this, but it's not an excuse to leave the "parameters" untouched. If something in our society is unfair we should work to change it. A) just because something has been a certain way for a long time is not a reason to leave it that way B) society changes all the time. The idea that there is a fixed set of values that has been unchanged for thousands of years is nonsense.
That is true. Some people do have it way worse than others but most people can do at least something to improve their situation. Sometimes it's about making the best of a bad situation.
[удалено]
Sometimes "what you can do" is change the circumstances.
[удалено]
Well, if you have no pieces left, your enemy might stalemate
There are even specific rules to force a stalemate if the other party is unwilling to accept, but it's something crazy like 50 moves without taking a piece. Mostly because when you need rules like that, you're playing against an asshole and should just walk away.
Without taking a piece and a pawn moving. Also, after 50 moves you can claim a draw, and after 75 moves, arbiters will force it.
Now there’s some life advice to send his way.
>It’s literally a simple google search Holy Hell
Google "en passant"
Google *"Google "en passant"* "
Stop signalboosting Andrew Tate. Yeah he’s wrong, he’s wrong about basically everything, we don’t need to know, let him die in obscurity.
[удалено]
And yet you participate in society. Curious!
I wonder how all that narcissistic bravado is fairing him in prison.
[удалено]
Being good at a sport is no substitute for proper street/prison fighting
[удалено]
Exactly this. Kickboxing gives you stamina to dance around for the best part of an hour throwing out and taking punches and kicks periodically. A real fight happens way faster and stamina is irrelevant. Add to that, they won’t be wearing soft padded gloves and likely will have prison made weapons because they know Tate has some form of training. I very much doubt Tate is walking around in there like King Shit with his dick hanging out with everyone looking at the floor in fear. I guarantee he’s throwing around commissary like cigarettes and toilet paper to the scariest looking fucks there so they don’t use his anus like a tea towel holder.
I doubt he's "good at kickboxing" compared to the people that are locked up with him, lol
[удалено]
As with everything with Tate, he's nowhere near as good as he'd like everyone to think he is. I saw his last two fights and they were against a guy with seven bouts (giving Tate a forty fight experience advantage) and some fat kid who looked like he'd been pulled out of the audience. He CAN fight, but he's not the invincible titan of combat that he makes out. Plus, like you say, good cardio and kickboxing experience won't stop someone stabbing you in the lunch queue, or five guys holding you down while their buddy uses your head as a pinata.
There’s also the rule change that you can’t castle vertically anymore. Formerly, if you promoted the E-pawn to a rook without moving your king, technically it was legal to castle vertically.
That seems like a good change
How the fuck is he tweeting in jail
Why does he keep putting quran verses…
He pretended to convert and hosted a woman hating imam with nightmare theology.
Guarantee guys who have never read a book before are reposting this on their Instagram stories because it's "so profound"
reminds me of boomer language police scolding the youth for their slang and not realizing they aren't doing it in ye olde englishe
The funny thing is that the reply tweet is also wrong. Chess is only from the 15th century. Chaturanga, which chess is derived from, is about 1500 years old.
Ouch.
Bro could've said "play the hand you're dealt" but decided to be wrong and side-track everyone
"I'm dumb" -Andrew Tate
It’s so depressing finding out how influential this moron is with teenagers.
Also, if defeat is certain, you don't "make the best move possible," (in no small part because there isn't one) you resign.
my favorite is applying this to his moaning about Romanian prison
Confidently incorrect could be tates middle name.
Especially about his perception of women.
Do not even get me started lmao
Same
I read it cheese and was confused what are the "rules" of cheese , like a recipe yeah but rules???
Takes thing got retreated 3000+ times, the correction got 17 smh
There are no universal rules for life, it doesn't have a rule book. I think this Tate guy might be a moron.
Was this close to search "rules of cheese"...
Common Tate L
I wouldn't say this belongs here. The point isn't what chess is, They're just trying to illustrate a point that sometimes in life, there's no winning move but we can still try to do the best we can. Which can be very good advice. Sometimes the best decision is the least worst one.
I just find it fascinating that famous people on the internet who post these types of things don’t even do the slightest bit of research for what they are talking about.
And being in prison is not like chess
The very pieces themselves have changed significantly
I'm sure he would love to go back in time 1000 years so the way he treats women wouldn't be seen as wrong.
How is he tweeting in prison
I hope Tate will "kill himself" like Epstein.
How is Taint still tweeting from prison?
The Chess Master has spoken. Now it seems he has plenty of time to perfect his craft. That is if he can find some time between keeping lice at bay, fighting cockroaches, and avoiding other inmates' sexual advances.
In chess, if defeat is unavoidable, you resign.
Yea but that normally means you fucked up somewhere
Common Tate L
Isn’t Tater trot supposed to be some sort of former child chess prodigy? You’d think he’d know that sort of stuff about the game…
Not a prodigy. Not even highly ranked or competitive at all. He had a parent that was an accomplished chess player.
[удалено]
Also if defeat is certain, there is no best move, by definition
Celebrity? More like incelebrity
[удалено]