Page 1 of 13 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 190
  1. #1
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,842

    2014 Laws Changes General Discussion Thread (was Changes Deferred to 2014)

    Quote Originally Posted by FIDE
    Proposed changes to the Laws of Chess will be further discussed at the EB in Tallinn in October 2013 to be implemented in 2014. There will be no changed to the Laws of Chess at 1st July 2013.
    I think this is unfortunate. Excellent progress had been achieved in a number of areas and presumably there are just a few hold-ups that are causing this delay. Hopefully the new Laws will be implemented from the start of 2014 not the middle of the year.

  2. #2
    CC International Master Jesper Norgaard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    1,002
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Bonham
    I think this is unfortunate. Excellent progress had been achieved in a number of areas and presumably there are just a few hold-ups that are causing this delay. Hopefully the new Laws will be implemented from the start of 2014 not the middle of the year.
    I agree there were a lot of good changes.

    I do hope sincerely that the holdup may be for redefining 3.7.e to the following, which was published by Geurt Gijssen in the October 2012 column of "An Arbiter's Notebook":

    When a player having the move intends to play a pawn to the rank
    furthest from its starting position he must exchange that pawn as part of
    the same move for a new queen, rook, bishop or knight of the same
    colour on the square of arrival. The player's choice is not restricted to
    pieces that have been captured previously. This exchange of a pawn for
    another piece is called 'promotion', and the effect of the new piece is
    immediate. The act of promotion may be performed in various ways: the
    pawn does not have to be placed on the square of arrival, and removing
    the pawn, removing any captured piece, and putting the new piece on
    the square of arrival may occur in any order.


    I had made a suggestion myself about how to change this rule, and I felt strongly about the incompleteness and ambiguity of the older versions of the rule. Still, the proposed rule is not really close to mine, but seems to have been made even more detached to any notion of obligatory order. It copes with all the problems I had with the older versions, and feels smooth and elegant too. I like the word-smithering that has gone into it.

    The rule that was agreed upon in the last meeting was this:

    "When a pawn reaches the rank furthest from its starting position it must
    be exchanged as part of the same move on the same square for a new
    queen, rook, bishop or knight of the same colour. The player's choice is
    not restricted to pieces that have been captured previously. This
    exchange of a pawn for another piece is called 'promotion' and the
    effect of the new piece is immediate. The pawn can be removed from the
    board and the new piece be put on the appropriate square in any order."

    That version however has the problem that some arbiters might still argue that if you don't move the pawn to the promotion square before exchanging it with the new piece, it would still be an illegal or invalid move.

    I can only guess that this is the reason for the delay, because there was also at least one presidential board suggestion that conflicted with an arbiter committee suggestion as far as I remember.
    Chess well played is imagination, calculation, observation, experience and memorization in order of importance.

  3. #3
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,842
    See here:

    http://www.fide.com/component/conten...sion-rtrc.html

    for more details of what was and wasn't yet changed.

    Jesper, looks like you have had a win of sorts on 3.7e, with the quote above being split into two bits and recommended to Tallinn.

  4. #4
    CC International Master Jesper Norgaard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    1,002
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Bonham
    See here:

    http://www.fide.com/component/conten...sion-rtrc.html

    for more details of what was and wasn't yet changed.

    Jesper, looks like you have had a win of sorts on 3.7e, with the quote above being split into two bits and recommended to Tallinn.
    Thanks Kevin, a win of prediction what rule changes will happen is not anything I care about. However since I was asking for that the order of actions (put pawn on square of arrival (optional), remove pawn, remove captured piece, putting new piece on the square of arrival) should be valid in any order, that does feel like a win. A win for Chess, hopefully.

    (new) 4.6 The act of promotion may be performed in various ways:
    1. the pawn does not have to be placed on the square of arrival,
    2. removing the pawn and putting the new piece on the square of arrival may occur in any order.
    If an opponent’s piece stands on the square of arrival, it must be captured or removed.


    In the last sentence, why is there "captured or removed"? They seem equivalent. Sounds more logical to me "captured and removed"? In fact, wouldn't just "removed" be sufficient?
    Chess well played is imagination, calculation, observation, experience and memorization in order of importance.

  5. #5
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,842
    Yes, that seems illogical to me too. I'd just put "captured".

    Actually the new wording seems to me to introduce some danger of people promoting by moving directly forward to an occupied square.

  6. #6
    CC International Master Jesper Norgaard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    1,002
    Quote Originally Posted by Recommendation
    Appendix B. Blitz
    ...
    B.2 The penalties mentioned in Articles 7 and 9 of the Competition Rules shall be one minute instead of two minutes.
    Great and makes sense.

    Quote Originally Posted by Recommendation
    B.3 Where one arbiter supervises one game the Competition Rules and A.2 shall apply.

    B.4 Where one arbiter supervises more than one game the following shall apply:

    a. Play shall be governed by the Rapidplay Laws as in Appendix A except where they are overridden by the following Laws.

    b. Article 10 and Appendix A.4.c do not apply.

    c. An illegal move is completed once the player has pressed his clock. Before he has made his move, the opponent is then entitled to claim a win. However the game is drawn if the position is such that the opponent cannot checkmate the player’s king by any possible series of legal moves.
    Once the opponent has made his own move, an illegal move cannot be corrected unless this is agreed by the players without intervention of the arbiter.
    ...
    B5. The Rules for a tournament shall specify which Article, B3 or B.4, shall apply for each and every round.
    The definition in B5 does seem to give the organizer the freedom to choose B3 even if not all games will be supervised by a single arbiter. If looking at a playoff with 4 players and 1 arbiter, that makes perfect sense. I never liked that a player making an illegal move loses the whole game in Blitz. If he has a queen vs. pawn and 2 minutes on the clock, if making an illegal move he will be reduced to 1 minute on the clock, and he can still win.

    I have played Blitz tournaments where I have won 2-3 games out of 14 on illegal moves. It just seems Draconian to me.

    However, is B5 opening up for a Blitz tournament with 64 players and 1 arbiter, running on normal rules? It would technically violate the definition of B3, with one arbiter per game.
    Last edited by Jesper Norgaard; 05-08-2013 at 11:01 AM.
    Chess well played is imagination, calculation, observation, experience and memorization in order of importance.

  7. #7
    CC International Master Jesper Norgaard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    1,002
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Bonham
    Yes, that seems illogical to me too. I'd just put "captured".

    Actually the new wording seems to me to introduce some danger of people promoting by moving directly forward to an occupied square.
    Except that would not comply with 3.7.a and/or 3.7.c. I think we're covered.
    Chess well played is imagination, calculation, observation, experience and memorization in order of importance.

  8. #8
    CC Grandmaster antichrist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    17,429
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Recommendation
    Appendix B. Blitz
    ...
    B.2 The penalties mentioned in Articles 7 and 9 of the Competition Rules shall be one minute instead of two minutes.

    AC
    I prefer two minutes or even three or four if need to think deeply and to get concentration back
    Zionism is racism as defined by the UN, Israel by every dirty means available steals land and water, kill Palestinian freedom fighters and civilians, and operates an apartheid system to drive more Palestinians off their land

  9. #9
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,842
    Quote Originally Posted by antichrist
    AC
    I prefer two minutes or even three or four if need to think deeply and to get concentration back
    In a blitz game? Yeah right ....

  10. #10
    CC Grandmaster antichrist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    17,429
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Bonham
    In a blitz game? Yeah right ....
    well I did go to the trouble of finding clause 7 (so I would not be taking rubbish in a chess thread) and did not see blitz mentioned. clause 9 was not in same thread on this board

    Article 7.5
    Quote:
    If during a game it is found that pieces have been displaced from their squares, the position before the irregularity shall be re-instated. If the position immediately before the irregularity cannot be determined, the game shall continue from the last identifiable position prior to the irregularity. The clocks shall be adjusted according to Article 6.13. The game shall then continue from this re-instated position.
    Zionism is racism as defined by the UN, Israel by every dirty means available steals land and water, kill Palestinian freedom fighters and civilians, and operates an apartheid system to drive more Palestinians off their land

  11. #11
    CC Grandmaster Garvinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    13,087
    These changes are difficult to fully understand in terms of working out what will be different.

    For instance from reading these comments that perhaps an illegal move in blitz will now be time penalty of one minute, instead of loss of game. But this could be my misunderstanding of the snakes and ladders of following the process of changes.

    Could a full summary be provided?

    To try and understand certainly does not help a lot of the time when the summaries are shown saying (except following this and that rule).

  12. #12
    CC International Master Jesper Norgaard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    1,002
    Quote Originally Posted by antichrist
    well I did go to the trouble of finding clause 7 (so I would not be taking rubbish in a chess thread) and did not see blitz mentioned. clause 9 was not in same thread on this board

    Article 7.5
    Quote:
    If during a game it is found that pieces have been displaced from their squares, the position before the irregularity shall be re-instated. If the position immediately before the irregularity cannot be determined, the game shall continue from the last identifiable position prior to the irregularity. The clocks shall be adjusted according to Article 6.13. The game shall then continue from this re-instated position.
    Well antichrist, I did have a laugh at your saying that you wouldn't be taking rubbish in a chess thread - compared to all the rubbish you generate. I do have a feeling that it is a masquerade, you're trolling while being serious enough to organize tournaments, to mention one thing you do. Aren't you a spy troll sent out from that other Australian chess site?

    These are the clauses that are reduced from 2 to 1 minutes in Blitz games, taken from article 7 and 9 of the laws of chess:

    7.4.b. After the action taken under Article 7.4.a, for the first two illegal moves by a player the arbiter shall give two minutes extra time to his opponent in each instance; for a third illegal move by the same player, the
    arbiter shall declare the game lost by this player. However, the game is drawn if the position is such that the opponent cannot checkmate the player’s king by any possible series of legal moves.

    9.5 If a player claims a draw as in Article 9.2 or 9.3, he may stop both clocks. (See Article 6.12.b) He is not allowed to withdraw his claim.
    a. If the claim is found to be correct the game is immediately drawn.
    b. If the claim is found to be incorrect, the arbiter shall add three minutes to the opponent’s thinking time.
    Then the game shall continue. If the claim was based on an intended move, this move must be made as according to Article 4.

    The 9.5 rule mentions three minutes, but is perhaps being replaced with 2 minutes in this new revision of the laws of chess. This draw claim could either be 3 times repetition of position, or 50 moves with no pawn moves or captured pieces. The 50 moves rule is of course a bit difficult to determine in a Blitz game, so I can't really see it being refuted by an arbiter either to lead to the 1 minute penalty. Can anyone?
    Chess well played is imagination, calculation, observation, experience and memorization in order of importance.

  13. #13
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,842
    Quote Originally Posted by antichrist
    well I did go to the trouble of finding clause 7 (so I would not be taking rubbish in a chess thread) and did not see blitz mentioned.
    But didn't notice that the text you quoted contained "Appendix B: Blitz"?

    Sometimes I think I should just kick you out of this section for good. You don't seem to contribute anything to it except personal hobby-horses and stupidity.

  14. #14
    CC International Master Jesper Norgaard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    1,002
    Quote Originally Posted by Garvinator
    These changes are difficult to fully understand in terms of working out what will be different.

    For instance from reading these comments that perhaps an illegal move in blitz will now be time penalty of one minute, instead of loss of game. But this could be my misunderstanding of the snakes and ladders of following the process of changes.

    Could a full summary be provided?

    To try and understand certainly does not help a lot of the time when the summaries are shown saying (except following this and that rule).
    I think the problem is that the RTRC meeting summary talks about changes to previously agreed changes to the laws of chess originally planned for July 1, 2013. I doubt we will get a clearer picture until the final rules are published.

    If I understand it correctly, the illegal move change for Blitz with time penalty of 1 minute instead of 2 is only happening in a tournament for which the organizer has already decided to play all rounds with normal rules and B1 to B3 instead of special Blitz rules including B4 and B5. This could happen because there is 1 arbiter for each game, or the organizer will handle all games as if there were 1 arbiter for each game. Just my interpretation, you understand. If there are 20 players and 10 arbiters, the requirement is fulfilled, until one of the arbiters goes to the little house. Then it's broken. We live in an imperfect world.

    The organizer of a Blitz tournament must decide:
    B5. The Rules for a tournament shall specify which Article, B3 or B4, shall apply for each and every round.

    I kind of like this rule. The organizers can decide for themselves if they are willing to accept the extra effort in a given tournament to handle it after Competition Rules, or want to avoid the hassle by using the old Blitz rules where illegal move loses.
    Chess well played is imagination, calculation, observation, experience and memorization in order of importance.

  15. #15
    Illuminati Bill Gletsos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    16,584
    Quote Originally Posted by Jesper Norgaard
    The organizer of a Blitz tournament must decide:
    B5. The Rules for a tournament shall specify which Article, B3 or B4, shall apply for each and every round.

    I kind of like this rule. The organizers can decide for themselves if they are willing to accept the extra effort in a given tournament to handle it after Competition Rules, or want to avoid the hassle by using the old Blitz rules where illegal move loses.
    I dont see it that way.
    My reading is that the organiser by stipulating whether B3 or B4 applies is committing to having one arbiter per game or not.

    I do not read it as allowing the situation with one arbiter supervising more than one game to be played under B3.

    It does however allow for the situation of B4 in the early rounds becoming B3 in later rounds if the event is a knockout.
    The Force can have a strong influence on the weak-minded.
    Mos Eisley spaceport The toolbox. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Tournament Invitations Discussion Thread
    By Mischa in forum Overseas Tournament News and Results
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 30-11-2016, 07:25 PM
  2. 44th Parliament General Discussion Thread
    By Kevin Bonham in forum Politics
    Replies: 693
    Last Post: 08-05-2016, 06:50 AM
  3. Laws of Chess from 1 July 2014
    By Allan Menham in forum Australian Chess
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 13-06-2014, 10:57 PM
  4. Glen Eira Championship Qualifier #2 9/5 2014-27/7/2014
    By Carl Gorka in forum Completed Tournaments
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 14-05-2014, 10:06 PM
  5. Replies: 20
    Last Post: 30-03-2014, 06:47 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
  •