Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 42
  1. #1
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    40,358

    Arbiter's corner: pressing the clock before promoting

    The issue of what to do when a player plays (for instance) Ph7-h8 then presses the clock before replacing the pawn with a queen or other piece has been discussed here before. This is the most relevant part of Gijssen's comment on it in his latest Arbiter's Notebook:

    The correct action, when a player promotes without replacing the pawn with a piece and presses his clock, is to stop the clocks and call the arbiter, who must then take appropriate measures. But what are appropriate measures? It goes too far to award a win. The correct action is to compensate the offended player by giving him 1 or 2 minutes of extra time. I do not consider this incomplete promotion as an illegal move, but as an illegal action.
    (I have indicated in bold a piece I think is important because in the past I have argued that things like this should be treated as incomplete moves and not as illegal moves, ie what is illegal is pressing the clock before the move is finished.)
    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

  2. #2
    CC Grandmaster Garvinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    13,310
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Bonham
    The issue of what to do when a player plays (for instance) Ph7-h8 then presses the clock before replacing the pawn with a queen or other piece has been discussed here before. This is the most relevant part of Gijssen's comment on it in his latest Arbiter's Notebook:



    (I have indicated in bold a piece I think is important because in the past I have argued that things like this should be treated as incomplete moves and not as illegal moves, ie what is illegal is pressing the clock before the move is finished.)
    i know what most players do is not necessarily the correct course of action under the rules, but wouldnt most players just re hit the opponents clock and tell them to put the new piece on the board before hitting the clock?

  3. #3
    . eclectic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    .
    Posts
    2,840
    KB,

    I suspect that a new rule might be added

    "In the absence of an announcement a promoted pawn not substituted shall be deemed to be a queen."

    I wonder if the other player in response might be able to deliver checkmate by deciding that his opponent's promoted pawn is a piece which suits his intentions.

    Just being facetious

    eclectic
    .

  4. #4
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    40,358
    Quote Originally Posted by ggrayggray
    i know what most players do is not necessarily the correct course of action under the rules, but wouldnt most players just re hit the opponents clock and tell them to put the new piece on the board before hitting the clock?
    Many do (just as many do the same when a player knocks pieces over and does not put them back before pressing). This is incorrect under the rules; the correct course of action when a player fails to complete a promotion is to stop the clock and get the arbiter. As Gijssen's reply shows, you can even get some free time this way!
    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. #5
    Illuminati Bill Gletsos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    17,058
    Consider the following sequence occurs.

    1) White pushes a pawn to the 8th rank.
    2) White Presses his clock.
    3) White grabs a Queen.
    4) Black makes a move and presses his clock.
    5) White places his new queen on the Board.
    6) White then moves a either the queen or another piece and presses his clock.
    7) Black claims illegal move as step 5 occurred no longer as part of Step 1 but as a distinct step due to Black's step 4.

  6. #6
    . eclectic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    .
    Posts
    2,840
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Gletsos
    Consider the following sequence occurs.

    1) White pushes a pawn to the 8th rank.
    2) White Presses his clock.
    3) White grabs a Queen.
    4) Black makes a move and presses his clock.
    5) White places his new queen on the Board.
    6) White then moves a either the queen or another piece and presses his clock.
    7) Black claims illegal move as step 5 occurred no longer as part of Step 1 but as a distinct step due to Black's step 4.
    we could have the rules backtrack to step 1) but have instead black chose for white what the new piece will be ...

    the legality of black's move or range of legal moves available in 4) might be affected by not having the promoted piece on the board

    clearly white is doing 1) and 2) to save time by not selecting then placing a piece and also to confuse the opponent who cannot assume that a queen will necessarily be chosen

    it would seem to be the type of stunt that a lightning or blitz player would try to pull

    eclectic
    .

  7. #7
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    40,358
    Quote Originally Posted by eclectic
    we could have the rules backtrack to step 1) but have instead black chose for white what the new piece will be ...
    Sounds like cruel and unusual punishment to me.
    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

  8. #8
    Illuminati Bill Gletsos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    17,058
    Quote Originally Posted by eclectic
    we could have the rules backtrack to step 1) but have instead black chose for white what the new piece will be ...
    Sorry but I'm not interested in such folly.

    Quote Originally Posted by eclectic
    the legality of black's move or range of legal moves available in 4) might be affected by not having the promoted piece on the board
    Not valid.
    In that case White should have stopped the clock and summoned the arbiter instead of starting Blacks clock.

    Quote Originally Posted by eclectic
    clearly white is doing 1) and 2) to save time by not selecting then placing a piece and also to confuse the opponent who cannot assume that a queen will necessarily be chosen
    I would agree with this.

    Quote Originally Posted by eclectic
    it would seem to be the type of stunt that a lightning or blitz player would try to pull
    True.

    At a NSW State Lightning Championship a few years back the following position occurred.

    White: Kg3, A Rook somewhere on the "a" file
    Black: Kg1, Pawn h2.
    It was Black to move.
    Black played h1 and pressed his clock.
    He neither said anything nor promoted the pawn.
    White played Ra1 mate.
    Black then replaced the pawn on a1 with a Black Knight and captured whites King which was now in check. (King captures were legal)
    As expected an argument broke out between them.
    The arbiter appeared.
    Whilst the arbiter considered his options Black somehow managed to convince White to call it a draw.
    The arbiter accepted this.

    This raises a couple of questions.
    Firstly what should the arbiters actions be with regards what happened on the board.
    Secondly can the players agree to a draw under the circumstances.

    Lets look at the game position first.
    Clearly Black is trying to pull a swifty and should not be allowed to benefit from his actions.

    I think the ruling should be that Black lost the right to promote his pawn as soon as White played the mating move Ra1 and the game ended at that point. Therefore White wins.
    What however would have happend if the White rook had been on say a5 and there was a white pawn on a2. White cannot mate now so what if White had played Rb5. Clearly Black should not benefit from his attempted swindle (some may even call it cheating). If White has pressed his clock after moving the rook then I dont believe Black should be allowed to promote the pawn at all. It should remain on a1 as a pawn. If White has not pressed his clock then if Black now makes the pawn a Knight then White should stop the clock and summon the arbiter.

    Now lets look at the situation where the players agree to a draw whilst the arbiter is considering his decision. I'm not sure they should be allowed to do this. The game was stopped and the arbiter asked to make a ruling. Whilst the arbiter is pondering his decision the game is in a suspended state hence the players cannot make any binding decision. The arbiter should make a ruling and if he determines the game should continue in some manner then the players can agre to the draw (if of course they would still want to).

  9. #9
    CC International Master Rhubarb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,635
    Against Zhao in the Sydney grade matches earlier this year I had about a minute to make 8 moves (no increment). I was about to promote to a second queen but there were no other queens nearby, so I stopped the clock, told Z-Y that I intended to queen, went looking for a queen and eventually found one 30 seconds later, restarted my clock and promoted properly. Z-Y didn't object at all to this, but are my actions correct? It's hard to see what else I could've done since I still had two rooks on the board as well, else I might have tried the old upside down rook.

  10. #10
    CC International Master JGB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,120
    Quote Originally Posted by kegless
    Against Zhao in the Sydney grade matches earlier this year I had about a minute to make 8 moves (no increment). I was about to promote to a second queen but there were no other queens nearby, so I stopped the clock, told Z-Y that I intended to queen, went looking for a queen and eventually found one 30 seconds later, restarted my clock and promoted properly. Z-Y didn't object at all to this, but are my actions correct? It's hard to see what else I could've done since I still had two rooks on the board as well, else I might have tried the old upside down rook.
    We had the same thing happen in a league game last year, and the guy used the old upside down rook, which the opponent of course allowed knowing that a rook is always a rook regardless of how it stands. The player not knowing he had underpromoted until he made a false rook move which his opponent quickly drew his attention to. So we learnt pretty quickly to just stop the clock and draw the adjudicators attention to the matter of an extra queen not being available.
    Last edited by JGB; 22-10-2004 at 09:06 PM.

  11. #11
    Illuminati Bill Gletsos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    17,058
    Quote Originally Posted by kegless
    Against Zhao in the Sydney grade matches earlier this year I had about a minute to make 8 moves (no increment). I was about to promote to a second queen but there were no other queens nearby, so I stopped the clock, told Z-Y that I intended to queen, went looking for a queen and eventually found one 30 seconds later, restarted my clock and promoted properly. Z-Y didn't object at all to this, but are my actions correct? It's hard to see what else I could've done since I still had two rooks on the board as well, else I might have tried the old upside down rook.
    I'll be pedantic here Greg.
    Given there is no arbiter at the Grade Matches then your actions are entirely correct.
    If however this was a tournament with an arbiter present then instead of searching for the queen yourself you should ask the arbiter to provide one. (Make him earn his DOP fee )

    I known Gijssen has mentioned that the use of the old upside down rook is not acceptable.

  12. #12
    CC International Master Rhubarb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,635
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Gletsos
    I'll be pedantic here Greg.
    Given there is no arbiter at the Grade Matches then your actions are entirely correct.
    If however this was a tournament with an arbiter present then instead of searching for the queen yourself you should ask the arbiter to provide one. (Make him earn his DOP fee )

    I known Gijssen has mentioned that the use of the old upside down rook is not acceptable.
    Okay thanks. Supposing I want to play devil's advocate and ask what happens when there's no extra queen, no arbiter, both rooks are still on the board and an unreasonable opponent?

  13. #13
    . eclectic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    .
    Posts
    2,840
    Quote Originally Posted by kegless
    Okay thanks. Supposing I want to play devil's advocate and ask what happens when there's no extra queen, no arbiter, both rooks are still on the board and an unreasonable opponent?
    should we then pray that an infamous doeberl cup incident does not repeat itself? ...



    eclectic
    .

  14. #14
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    40,358
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Gletsos
    Firstly what should the arbiters actions be with regards what happened on the board.
    I would do one of the following depending on my impression of how blatant Black's attempt to cheat had been:

    (*) declare the game lost for Black for a serious attempt to cheat.

    (*) require Black to knight the pawn and award White extra time, with the game continuing with White to move from the position after the pawn was knighted.

    What however would have happend if the White rook had been on say a5 and there was a white pawn on a2. White cannot mate now so what if White had played Rb5. Clearly Black should not benefit from his attempted swindle (some may even call it cheating).
    As above. Note that while in the former case knighting the pawn was the "best" move (it loses, but it is the only move that forces White to think at all), in this case knighting the pawn is a blunder as Black should have queened it, so making him knight the pawn will be a fairly serious penalty.

    If White has pressed his clock after moving the rook then I dont believe Black should be allowed to promote the pawn at all. It should remain on a1 as a pawn.
    I don't like this, firstly for the same "it's just not chess" reason as I don't like Barry's game-continues-after-king-capture idea, and secondly because there is bound to be a possible position in which pawning a pawn (!) draws while everything else loses. (The idea would be that after pawning, a stalemate cannot be prevented.) There would also be positions where pawning the pawn still lost but made the win more difficult. Such things should not be encouraged.

    Now lets look at the situation where the players agree to a draw whilst the arbiter is considering his decision. I'm not sure they should be allowed to do this. The game was stopped and the arbiter asked to make a ruling. Whilst the arbiter is pondering his decision the game is in a suspended state hence the players cannot make any binding decision. The arbiter should make a ruling and if he determines the game should continue in some manner then the players can agre to the draw (if of course they would still want to).
    I agree.
    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

  15. #15
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    40,358
    Quote Originally Posted by kegless
    Okay thanks. Supposing I want to play devil's advocate and ask what happens when there's no extra queen, no arbiter, both rooks are still on the board and an unreasonable opponent?
    I think you would have to agree on a queen substitute as this situation is not precisely covered under the Laws.

    Quote Originally Posted by JGB
    We had the same thing happen in a league game last year, and the guy used the old upside down rook, which the opponent of course allowed knowing that a rook is always a rook regardless of how it stands. The player not knowing he had underpromoted until he made a false rook move which his opponent quickly drew his attention to.
    *laughs*

    That is brilliant.
    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

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Arbiter's Corner: Notes & Queries
    By arosar in forum Arbiters' Corner
    Replies: 397
    Last Post: 08-03-2019, 08:03 PM
  2. Articles G4-G6 (was Rule 10.2)
    By Kevin Bonham in forum Arbiters' Corner
    Replies: 169
    Last Post: 24-08-2014, 09:20 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
  •