Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 100
  1. #16
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    135
    Quote Originally Posted by ggrayggray
    until the first argument where one players claim he/she wasnt in check.
    But then, what do you do when the first player claims his queen wasn't hanging?

  2. #17
    CC Grandmaster Alan Shore's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Crane, Poole & Schmidt
    Posts
    3,871
    Quote Originally Posted by ggrayggray
    until the first argument where one players claim he/she wasnt in check.
    Nice try but you could just as easily use that argument for any move. And I hear all the time in my coaching classes 'He took his finger off after he moved! No I didn't! Yes you did!' but I'm sure it'll be more mature than that, haha.

    Quote Originally Posted by jay_vee
    But then, what do you do when the first player claims his queen wasn't hanging?
    Exactly. Hopefully there'll be witnesses! It'd make my job easier.
    "I can't go back to yesterday because I was a different person then."
    - White Queen, Alice through the Looking-Glass

  3. #18
    Illuminati Bill Gletsos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    17,173
    The following is the history of the situation and includes extracts from an email I sent to Geurt Gijssen the Chairman of the FIDE Rules Commission and which he published in the May 2002 issue of his Arbiters Notebook column on Chesscafe.


    From 1977 when the FIDE Central Committee meeting approved the "FIDE
    Regulations for Five-minute Chess" thru to I believe 1992 the section of those
    regulations on The Won Game stated in rule 8:

    The game is won by the player a) who has mated his opponent's King b) whose opponent declares that he resigns c) whose opponent completes an illegal move, which includes leaving his King in check or moving his King into check, but only if the player claims the win before he himself touches a piece (see rule 17) or captures the King as valid proof d) whose opponent's flag falls first, at any time before the game is otherwise ended.

    So for nearly 15 years that these FIDE Regulations existed taking the King was a valid means of claiming an illegal move. However in 1992 these regulations were replaced by "Regulations for Five Minute (Blitz) Chess" which were approved by the 1992 General Assembly and amended by the 1993 General Assembly. In these rules the rule regarding the won game was now rule 14 and section d replaced section 8c above. Rule 14d now reads:

    Whose opponent completes an illegal move, which includes leaving his King in check or moving his King into check, and neutralizes his clock (but only if the player claims the win before he himself has completed his move.)

    In late 1996 the FIDE rules were completely revised and incorporated all the rules regarding the general law, the supplemental laws regarding competitions, the rapid laws, the quickplay finish laws and the blitz laws into one complete set of laws. These came into force July 1st 1997.

    The essence of 14d above is now in C3 of the current laws. If in 1992 when the law changed effectively prohibiting the capture of the King had been raised and highlighted then, we would all probably accept it or have argued at the time for the old 8c rule to be re-instated. It could be argued that since 1977 no other rule in the laws of chess has been so fundamentally changed as the capturing the King rule has been.

    Having failed to highlight the significance of the rule change in 1992 it is a shame that the Rules Commission did not clarify the issue of capturing the King when the rules were revised in late 2000.

    However in 1998 the FIDE Rules Commission ruled that capturing the king in Blitz was not permitted.
    Unfortunately they failed to determine a penalty if a player did capture the king. In fact the members of the Rules Commission cannot reach a consensus.

    At the Rules Commission meeting during the Olympiad in Bled in 2002 the issue was discussed again. The following is taken directly from the minutes:

    Discussions took place about the situation in Blitz chess where a player makes a move, which leaves his king in check. There was no consensus. Some arbiters believed that, if the player captured his opponent’s king, then the player should lose. Others believed that the player should win. It was decided not to disturb the current rules in place. Thus, if a player effectively
    claims a win by capturing the king, he runs the risk of the arbiter declaring otherwise.


    Geurt Gijssen noted in reference to that extract the following:

    As a result, each arbiter in a Blitz tournament has to announce in
    advance what will happen if the King is captured.


    Thus there is no problem with having king captures allowed in Blitz provided the arbiter announces it at the start of the tournament. Likewise there is no problem if he announces King captures are not allowed and will lead to loss of the game.

    Charles Z has arbitered a number of Lightning events where he has announced King captures are legal.

  4. #19
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    40,724
    Very long debate on the king-capture subject on the old BB between the usual suspects here:

    http://www.chesskit.com/auschess/cgi...num=1055688507

    There is no currently prescribed penalty for king-capture, it is up to each arbiter to pre-announce what standard will apply. I always pre-announce loss of game.

    Bruce - I would add:

    * You can correct an illegal move if you have not pressed your clock. (you must still move/take pieces touched if it is possible to do so).
    * You must claim an illegal move before you have made your own move in reply.
    Moderation Requests: All requests for, comments about, or questions about moderation of any kind including thread changes must be posted in the Help and Feedback section and not on the thread in question. (Or by private message for routine changes or sensitive matters.)

    ACF Newsletter Information - All Australian players and administrators should subscribe and check each issue for relevant notices

    My psephology/politics site (token chess references only) : http://kevinbonham.blogspot.com.au/ Politics twitter feed https://twitter.com/kevinbonham

  5. #20
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    135
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Gletsos
    The following is the history of the situation and includes extracts from an email I sent to Geurt Gijssen the Chairman of the FIDE Rules Commission and which he published in the May 2002 issue of his Arbiters Notebook column on Chesscafe.
    (...)
    Yes, that was one of the Gijssen columns I remembered. I didn't realize it was you to whom he was replying, though.

  6. #21
    Illuminati Bill Gletsos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    17,173
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Bonham
    * You must claim an illegal move before you have made your own move in reply.
    The critical wording there is made.
    Made refers to making a move which means moving and/or capturing a piece and releasing it.
    You can still claim illegal move even if you have touched a piece.

    Completing a move means pressing the clock.
    There are however times when a move is completed without having to press the clock.
    One example is checkmate. The checkmating move is completed as soon as the players hand leaves the piece. The same is true for stalemating moves and a couple of other situations.

  7. #22
    CC Grandmaster Alan Shore's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Crane, Poole & Schmidt
    Posts
    3,871
    Thanks for that info Bill, very helpful. It is a good thing to know the arbiter can choose. I'll be keeping the king take rule - it's too ingrained in me. I hope at least some others would think the same way.

    And thanks Kevin, I'll add those points too.
    "I can't go back to yesterday because I was a different person then."
    - White Queen, Alice through the Looking-Glass

  8. #23
    Illuminati Bill Gletsos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    17,173
    Quote Originally Posted by jay_vee
    Yes, that was one of the Gijssen columns I remembered. I didn't realize it was you to whom he was replying, though.
    FWIW Stewart Reuben is also on the Rules Commission and is I believe in favour of allowing King captures in Blitz.
    Last edited by Bill Gletsos; 04-08-2004 at 01:47 AM.

  9. #24
    Reader in Slood Dynamics Rincewind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The multiverse
    Posts
    21,574
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Bonham
    Very long debate on the king-capture subject on the old BB between the usual suspects here:

    http://www.chesskit.com/auschess/cgi...num=1055688507

    There is no currently prescribed penalty for king-capture, it is up to each arbiter to pre-announce what standard will apply. I always pre-announce loss of game.

    Bruce - I would add:

    * You can correct an illegal move if you have not pressed your clock. (you must still move/take pieces touched if it is possible to do so).
    * You must claim an illegal move before you have made your own move in reply.
    Not again. If I remember correctly Bill and I (mainly but with the help of a few others) made between us smoething like 100 posts in 24 hours.

    My position is the rules need to be clarified but my interpretation of them at present is that king captures are legal in Blitz but capturing the opponent's king does NOT win you the game - since the object of the game is to checkmate the king, not capture it. Capturing your opponent's king just prevents you from ever being able to checkmate them.

    Check out the link above for the reasons.

    (NB I don't impose this view on anyone as I have been unable to convince others at my club that I am correct. Or rather they prefer to follow tradition than follow the rules. )
    So einfach wie möglich, aber nicht einfacher - Albert Einstein

  10. #25
    CC Candidate Master Javier Gil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Australia or Spain.
    Posts
    141
    I never understood the logic behind this rule, other than confusing people who had played this way for decades.
    I guess FIDE wanted people to believe they were "renovating" chess and that they were earning their salary by working so hard.
    They call "renovating" anything these days, even something as silly as this, which was a step backward for 90% of the people I talked to at the time (except the ones who usually lost their blitz games, as now they had a chance to claim a draw in a completely lost position).
    In fact, I think this might have been a bet made by some of the big fish in FIDE: "wanna bet I can change the rules of blitz and impose something as stupid as this?".
    Soon later they changed the time controls... but that's another story.

    I'm glad you'll let players take the King, Bruce.
    International Master and Professional Chess Coach.
    Website: http://www.chess.clinic
    Youtube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/c/chessclinic

  11. #26
    CC Grandmaster Garvinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    13,407
    im against king captures in blitz. I think it is just so much simpler to point your opponents error and claim the game cause of illegal move. I agree with kevins choice of loss of game for king capture.

    I said to Bruce the problems that can arise when allowing king captures. it is a situation that can be avoided simply by not allowing king captures.

  12. #27
    CC Grandmaster arosar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    5,047
    These 'problems' are in your head.

    Sane people allow king captures. It is the way of the world. And it must always be so.

    AR

  13. #28
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,444
    So Guert Gijssen is insane arosar.

  14. #29
    CC Grandmaster Garvinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    13,407
    Quote Originally Posted by ScottColliver
    So Guert Gijssen is insane arosar.
    and so is kevin and myself. That would mean the acf council has an insane person on the council and also an insane person running the australian open

  15. #30
    CC Grandmaster arosar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    5,047
    Yep, on this issue....Gijssen and youse two - gray and Kevo are insane.

    Do you always agree with Gijssen?

    AR

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Sesha (Web Engine for Tournament Websites)
    By skip to my lou in forum Australian Chess
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 20-04-2005, 11:19 AM
  2. mid north coast chess tournament
    By Garvinator in forum Completed Tournaments
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 24-02-2005, 02:59 PM
  3. FIDE rated tournament at Box Hill Chess Club
    By ursogr8 in forum Completed Tournaments
    Replies: 43
    Last Post: 07-07-2004, 08:28 AM
  4. Roulette tournament starting 6 July
    By News Bot in forum Games Australia
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 24-06-2004, 12:16 PM
  5. The 38th Ballarat Begonia Tournament
    By Bas in forum Completed Tournaments
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 15-02-2004, 01:57 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •