When would you NOT promote a pawn into a queen?

not always neccessary to promote your pawn to queen it can be rook also. but if we are out of time and we have booked a move so the pawn automatically promotes to queen.....

Sometimes you should though:

m.youtube.com/watch?v=NbNPgUqU3fQ

Had this once in a blindfold game :)

Knights are better in openings but bishops are better at endgame because it controls a diagonal

@AnishPat Ooooh didn't think of that! Nice catch!

#18

Yes, I can't believe someone remembered still.

I'm pretty sure the ONLY reason for promoting to a rook or bishop instead of the queen is to avoid (or get) stalemated! (In regular chess)

In an OTB tournament game, I once promoted to a bishop instead of a queen because a bishop was readily available at the table and an extra queen was not, and both promotions were mate-in-one.

By the way, here is a tiny puzzle I created to show underpromotion:

lichess.org/analysis/standard/8/6P1/8/8/8/7p/5B1p/4K2k_w_-_-_0_1

When promoting into a knight for a delicious smothermate. yummy

3 reasons that have happened to me.
1.- To avoid a stalemate.
2.- To practice K+B+N vs K or K+b+b vs K mate, in both cases, the only time i have arrived to such positions, i never got them organically, had to force them a couple of times.
3.- The one time i had a weird position. I was getting mated next move, i couldnt reposition my queen to avoid it, if i moved something else to avoid it, i was gonna draw by perpetual. But i promoted to a knight, which made my opponent move the king, then i actually could give a check after with my queen, and then reposition her to avoid the mate or the perpetual.

I was winning with some comfort, but you know you sometimes get in trouble out of nowhere. Won easily soon after.