|
« TAP TO LOG IN
|
Chess related: the touch rule
« Back to forum| From | Message | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
 the touch ruleHis opponent had White and had one (and only one) passed pawn, it was on the 7th rank, on h7 -- and it was White's move. Larsen realized that his opponent would lose if he promoted the pawn the next move, instead of defending his King. His opponent now picked up the White Queen from pieces off the board, and held it, considering what he would do. Larsen thought of calling the TD over to rule his opponent now had to promote the pawn, having touched the Queen it would become -- but Larsen didn't. His opponent went ahead and Queened his pawn -- and Larsen won 3 moves later. However, if asked, how would you have ruled? Did the player once he touched the off-the-board Queen have to promote his h-7 pawn? |
||
|
fmgaijin 23-May-11, 16:37 |
Until the P advances . . . |
||
|
Suppose... In my view the player is still in the process of making his move (not 'thinking' about it) and may not be interrupted by his opponent or anyone else. If he hasn't made up his mind before promoting which it is to be, well, that's his loss of time. It is rude, and an annoyance to his opponent, but it may be no more than an absence of mind that led to this behaviour. Let it go. It's not that important (touch move in other circumstances is, of course). This situation I regard as precisely similar to the situation in which a player picks up a piece to move but suddenly (possibly for good reason) has second (or it might be tenth) thoughts about its placement. Bad form, but not illegal, and it doesn't do to interrupt him in the act of moving. A couple of reasons from my own experience, limited as it is. Once as a schoolboy, I was half-way through playing in my first ever adult tournament (Stratford, Taranaki, 1969). I decided to develop by Queen's bishop. In the process of moving I was just about to place the bishop upon the g5-square when I realised as i reached it that it simply lost the bishop. With it still in hand I could legally have placed it on another square, and was about to do so. But in the meantime, my opponent had picked up his scoresheet and pen to record the move. In my inexperience, I thought I had to drop the piece where I had initially intended it to go (it being obvious that I had changed my mind mid-move if I dropped it on f4). Of course I lost the game a piece down. Many years later I was playing an opponent who, obviously feeling the effects of a hard and late previous evening, kept falling asleep in very distracting fashion over the board. At last he snorted and jerked in his seat causing me to look up in the act of placing a rook upon a square. Looking down I realised I had placed it a square too far, and hastily adjusted it with a small exclamation. You shoulda seen how fast this guy woke up. Too late. He asked. I denied. Nuff zed. |
||
|
fmgaijin 24-May-11, 15:21 |
Funniest Touch Move Ever? Here on GK I lost a winning game due to a "touch move" like Ion's last one--I was in the process of making a long R move when I sneezed, letting go of the mouse button and dropping the R on an unprotected square right next to my opponent's Q. Apparently I re-clicked the mouse on the "recoil" and managed to "Submit"! |
||
|
rich_sposato 25-May-11, 13:29 |
Rule 4.3: Except as providedin Article 4.2, if the player having the move deliberately touches on the chessboard: ... Note that rule 4.3 says "on the chessboard". The queen was off the chessboard at the time, so touch-move does not apply. The only rule that describes how touch-move rules apply to pawn promotion is Rule 4.4. The rule describes how the choice of promotion is made when the new piece touches the promotion square. Rule 4.4: If a player having the move: ... promotes a pawn, the choice of the piece is finalised, when the piece has touched the square of promotion. Here is how I would apply touch-move rules in this situation. So if the player picks up a queen which was off the chessboard and has the option of promoting a pawn to a queen, and then puts the queen down, then the touch-move rule does not apply. (The situation you describe above.) But let's say something slightly different happened. If the player picks up a queen which was off the chessboard, and then puts the queen onto the promotion square before removing the pawn, then the player is committed both to moving the pawn and promoting to a queen. Why? Because according to rule 4.4, the new piece now touches the chessboard. Again, an interesting situation. |
||
|
tactical_abyss 26-May-11, 20:52 |
You are correct.Piece touch on the board is what governs that rule.I have been an arbiter at many OTB events.But there are sometimes ambiguities.Some players like to "play games"and pick up a piece,hover it over the board(never touching the board),then place it back off the board,bring up another piece,hover it an eigtht of an inch off the board,hum alittle and smirk,place it down again,but never touching the board...just intimidating the opponent.Thats when I come over and rule on which piece that player will promote or warn the player that is wasting time.I've had to rule on a player last year at a college tournament that was drunk(I believe) and was holding two pawn promotion pieces up at one time and kept staring at them,then "licked"the Queen and placed it down on b8. This caused such a commotion,that I ruled the game in favor of his opponent,then tossed him out of the tournament. |
||
|
rich_sposato 27-May-11, 08:39 |
A player *licked* the queen? WTF!? Was that supposed to intimidate the opponent? (i.e. - Don't take my queen or you will get icky germs on your fingers!?) Looks like the player was the one who got the icky germs by licking them off the queen! Ew! Maybe FIDE can add a rule about drunken college kids licking chess pieces! |
||
|
tactical_abyss 27-May-11, 09:57 |
Funny...but true! Perhaps one day when I have more time,i'll start a whole string on some of the wild antics i've seen and done myself with OTB play.I'm off to Washington Square Park in a little while for some OTB play.The board i'm using today is a real cheapie because of the weirdo's I encounter sometimes at the park.I have no extra Queen,so I usually just turn my elephant shaped Rook(with the flat castle on the hump)upside down,representing a Queen promotion,if i'm going in for a second Queen.If i have no Rooks off the board by that time(rare),then I use a big thimble with the letter"Q"on it!Fancy! TA |
||
|
algol 27-May-11, 13:09 |
TA |
||
|
baronderkilt 29-May-11, 13:10 |
More strange but true ... They almost universally do as I do ... which is have a Queen in hand and swipe the pawn off the board while placing the Queen on the 8th in one motion. (I suppose we get that as a blitz habit !?) A few may place the Q then remove the pawn. But no one ever seems to Push the pawn then replace it ! (Exception, when playing bughouse and the pawn is left on the 8th tho it has become a Q) Yes I can think of a few who would push the pawn there, then place a Queen with a double wrist flip and grind it into the square to make sure it does not run away. lol. BUT ... I suppose another factor is that no one actually Makes or Lets their opp Q in tournament play, rather resigns unless a time shortage exists for the Queener. That must lead to the blitz swap techinque as well. And so I have never seen the double wrist flip etc promotion, tho I have seen it come at me upon an opponents perception of a Great Move. Dont you hate that when it IS a good move. }8-D |
||
|
baronderkilt 29-May-11, 13:21 |
btw ... the proper way to deflate a double wrist flip Oh lol, I've been obscene. Ok make it "Tilt" your head. omgosh |
||
|
liam1260 03-Jun-11, 07:24 |
Is this due to more thinking time? clearing the board to recognise any errors in the move before touching their own piece? I've seen this done two-handed aswell, captured piece one hand followed by the players piece with the other hand been placed on the square. I talked with one player that does this way of capturing and he told me that at an public tournament run by his own club, he made a move where the two pieces touched (captured and capturer) but the player saw that it was a mistake and was going back to the original square to a have another think. Intending to duly move the touched piece eventually, but a club-mate arbiter intervened and said the two pieces touched so you must take complete that capture. He lost the game and was not impressed. |
||
|
rich_sposato 03-Jun-11, 12:11 |
The touch-move rules apply to when a player touches an opponents piece before touching his or her own piece in order to capture. Rule 4.3.b explicitly addresses that very situation. "... if the player having the move deliberately touches on the chessboard ... one or more of his opponent’s pieces, he must capture the first piece touched which can be captured ..." I don't think touching the opponent's piece first during a capture gives you any more thinking time than touching your own piece first. It all takes about a second or two either way. I've seen people use two hands to complete a capture, but that is technically illegal in tournaments. Rule 4.1 says "Each move must be made with one hand only." Lastly, in the situation you described where a player touched his own piece and an opponent's piece, I'd say the arbiter was right. If a player touches a piece on each side, the player is obligated to capture the opponent's piece he touched with the other piece he touched. That specific situation is governed by Rule 4.3 - which you can look up here. ( www.fide.com ) Many people have time and again realized they were making mistakes right after they touched a piece, but they can't take it back. The touch move rules are very strict because otherwise players could touch and move several pieces and then decide which to play. They could move one piece around, put it back, move another, try out a capture with a third piece, and then finally settle on a move with a fourth piece. After all that fuss, how do you know the chess pieces were at the proper configuration when the player finally chose a move? Also, it is quite distracting to the other player's concentration. I see the three touch move rules as not just rules, but as a way to encourage people to play in a professional manner with respect for the opponent. |
||
|
forced to castle to e3 A for-instance would be this, before FIDE revised the Rules in the 1980's: It is White's turn to move. White has not castled, nor has he moved his King. He has a passed pawn on e7 and moves the pawn to e8. He then reaches for a piece to promote it to. His hand brushes across his own King, accidentally touching his piece. Your rule would then say that there is only one way to interpret this: White MUST now promote the Pawn (the first piece touched) to a Rook, move his King (the second piece touched) 2 squares towards the new rook (the King landing on e3), and now move the new Rook over the King (the rook landing on e2). (Yes, that was before the guiding rule was changed to define castling as taking place on the same rank. Rules are not always the repositories of wisdom, so they should not always be in charge.) |
||
|
rich_sposato 03-Jun-11, 13:16 |
As you said, the player accidentally brushed his king after he promoted a pawn, but before he grabbed the piece he wanted to use for promotion. The move started with a pawn going to e8, so that's a pawn move already in progress. If he touches any other piece after he touched that pawn, it is still a pawn move, and he has no obligation to move any other piece he touched. For example, what if he touched a bishop elsewhere on the board after promoting his pawn but before putting the promotion piece onto the board? He is not obligated to (or entitled to) a second move with the bishop? Even if he accidentally brushed his king while promoting a pawn, a player is not entitled to an additional move as well. Especially not some weird castling across the board. Rule 4.6.c says a move is over when "in the case of the promotion of a pawn, when the pawn has been removed from the chessboard and the player's hand has released the new piece after placing it on the promotion square." Once he took his hand off the new piece on the promotion square, the move is over. End of story. |
||
|
the move of a King |
||
|
baronderkilt 03-Jun-11, 17:00 |
What if ... |
||
|
tactical_abyss 03-Jun-11, 17:35 |
At my club tourneys where I have been an arbiter many times,that Rook/Queen problem(release) surfaces from time to time.The rules we follow are that you must verbally announce outloud your intention to promote the Rook to a Queen BEFOREHAND or else it becomes a Rook.Also it should be written in the scoresheet that a8=Queen for example.Also I have actually ruled AGAINST the Queen promotion when I found out that the opponent using the inverted Rook that was accidently released and the opponent then shouted Queen actually had 2 EXTRA Queens that he could have used and they were in plain view of BOTH opponents and ME.No I said,the Rook remains as a Rook,final. |
||
|
rich_sposato 03-Jun-11, 20:04 |
If the player announced "Queen" when he placed the rook upside down on the promotion square, I'd let the player have a queen even though extra queens were ready for use. The player announced his intention and followed the tradition of using an inverted rook. The fact that other queens were nearby is immaterial to me. (No pun intended.) I think the player's intent to promote to a queen was obvious. Now you did mention the player released the piece before the player shouted "Queen", and the rules do say the move is over once the player removes releases the promotion piece. Hmmm... I'd still let the player have the queen because the rules say nothing about making any verbal announcements about the promoted piece - so certainly the rules say nothing about announcing before or after the piece is let go. And the player did follow the "inverted rook is a queen" tradition". I think the whole situation is rather iffy since the rules provide no clear indication about what to do. I once had a strange promotion situation where the rules gave no indication of how to interpret my action. I just promoted a pawn to a queen, but my queen and both rooks were still on the board. However, both of my bishops were already captured, so I grabbed a bishop, said "queen" and placed it on the promotion square. My opponent thought it was rather odd to use a bishop as a queen, but instead of challenging the act and asking an arbiter to declare the queen to be really a bishop, he let it stand. A few moves later, my bishop-queen checkmated his king. After the game, an arbiter said that I could have paused the clock, taken a queen from another board (which was not in use), unpaused the clock, and then placed the other board's queen into the game. The arbiter allowed me to use a bishop as a queen because I announced my intention, and my opponent did not challenge the action. If my action was challenged, then I'd have to pause the game clock so I could go find another queen. |
||
|
baronderkilt 04-Jun-11, 00:16 |
After awhile of having enough busted That way all my pieces would still fit in the Box, which two extra Queens would not. This was especially handy for me, with my tendency to Tip-Over the inverted-Rook-Queens if trying to move at all fast, as during my traditional time trouble. |
||
|
tactical_abyss 04-Jun-11, 08:52 |
Ambiguities,hustlers,fights and trying to win at all costs... I'm not actually disagreeing with you,i'm aware of all the official rules of the USCF.But there has been many issues/problems and arguments regarding this inverted Rook scenario.The issue has become a problem at several chess clubs,so we have set up "written"club rules for all opponents that do not make it "iffy"anymore.Perhaps I wasen't specific enough above in my post,or maybe in haste written it wrongly. As baron said,what if the Rook is released first and not tuned upside down in the process "immediately"?Many opponents try and start arguments.To avoid this,the "verbal"and outloud intention(Say Queening!) before PLACING or REACHING for ANY pawn promotion piece.Also,some players have chess sets that are hand carved or are more difficult to distinguish as an upside down Rook.I personally have a marble chess set from Mexico where the Rook practically looks the same in either direction!And no,that set has no "felt"on the bottom!This is another complaint!And so,the issue goes on and on.Some players,Rich INTENTIONALLY remove the felt on the Rooks,so in quicker time controls or blitz,it becomes a problem,especially with custom sets.So thus,becomes the club rule of using the extra real Queen.If you do not have an extra Queen,ok,but make the intention clear in some way beforehand and before releasing PRIOR to inverting the Rook....especially with those oddball sets or other types of sets.I once put a game on hold against the inverted Rook even though the player made his intention clear!The other opponent complained that even though he said "Queening",the upside down Rook still looked like a Rook!And that player did have extra Queens.The game went on after I instructed the opponent to place a real queen on the board OR to place a piece of green or white felt on the inverted Rook(I have a drawer full!). Remember the Fischer games in 1972?How he complained about the pieces,even though they were regulation?The game never started of course,until the set was changed,but you get the idea! Another example is that some players are not using chess clocks.So imagine a player placing a Rook on the board with the intention of making it a Queen on h8.He "releases"the Rook and the other player IMMEDIATELY makes his move taking an opponents piece that would have been protected by an h8 Queen,but NOT an h8 Rook....before the other player inverted it or said anything? See Rich??This becomes additionally problematic.Again,the clubs are allowed to modify some rules as long as ALL the players agree to it,and in the case I mentioned on the other post,I ruled against that player. One of the preagreed club rules are to only use your extra Queen if you have it,and leave it in plain view for the opponent and the club arbiter.For once you release that piece(Rook) and do not make your intentions immediate,then it becomes ambigious,espeically if the other opponent moves instantaneously! The key is really NOT to release your queening Rook rightside up even for a second!Place it upside down from the beginning or else your opponent might win if he is quick enough and devious! Now the club level is not like some US Open.There are kids playing,opponents who are learning the game,players who want to cheat,players who will try anything to win like using the scenario with the Rook as an advantage to them,ect ect. So there are club rules and then there are the US Open rules... Modified on a need to use basis! TA |
||
|
maca 05-Jun-11, 01:44 |
Based on my arbiter training... However, what is more likely is that the opposing play would just insist the promoting player to acquire the actual piece. The player promoting to Queen has a right to stop the clocks and go look for an extra Queen if one is not available. This is probably easier in my country than in the United States, because he the organizer of the tournament provides the chess sets, which guarantees that pieces of different sets are more likely to be compatible. Regards, MaCa. |
||
|
rich_sposato 09-Jun-11, 12:46 |
Thanks for clarifying that. If a chess club has a house rule stating a player should declare the promotion piece BEFORE grabbing the piece to make sure everyone understands, or house rules about using an inverted rook, then that make sense. It's better to make a simple rule and provide clarity to everyone than to allow weird situations where people can hold a potential promotion piece just over the promotion square to try and psyche out the opponent. Like you, I'd rather have clear house rules so people can play friendly games. No confusion, no antics, no problems. No worries! Rich |
||
|
tactical_abyss 09-Jun-11, 12:59 |
See I don't tell everything thats goes on in the forums with my chess club or the college games I temporarily direct/arbitrate.There has been alot of troublemakers lately,cheaters and more.So,certain rules have to be twisted and modified to meet the immediate situation,even if those rules do not normally conform to the standards set up by the USCF. |
||
|
blake78613 09-Jun-11, 14:09 |
The above position is from a 1974 Candidates Match Korchnoi -Karpov. At this point Korchnoi asked the arbitrator if it was legal to castle in this position. My theory is that Korchnoi knew that he could castle, but wanted to be sure if the arbitrator knew before touching his King. |
||
|
tactical_abyss 10-Jun-11, 05:24 |
I've seen the old "Jadoube" trick played a good # of times on this touch rule stuff that I get sick of it and cannot rule against any opponent if I did not see it for myself.For example,a player touches a piece and at that very instant realizes that is NOT what they wanted to move.So they shout out...."adjust"or "Jadoube".Now,of course,the player is supposed to say this verbally BEFORE they touch the piece.But was anyone watching the game?If not,the player,if he wants to be a real wisecracker,can say...."yes,I said it before I touched that piece,not after!"Yes,he lied,but can you prove it?Believe me,this goes on quite often,especially with the teenagers playing at my club using those plastic pieces that do tend to vibrate off center of the square. |
||
|
Really the funniest pawn promotion ever ... Much confusion and laughter all round. I've often seen an upside-down Rook used as a substitute Queen (for example if the original Queen is still on the board) so I guess a Black Queen is OK to represent a White Queen? |
