Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 53
  1. #31
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (formerly Brisbane, and before that Wellington, NZ)
    Posts
    19,614
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Bonham View Post
    Rules now have a one-stop Table of Changes up:

    http://rules.fide.com/images/stories...s_-_GA__PB.pdf
    That's helpful thanks. I don't like the way tournament chess is going now, especially with cheating and draconian anti-cheating measures that make even the TSA look reasonable:

    11.3.3: The arbiter may require the player to allow his clothes, bags, other items or body to be inspected, in private. The arbiter or person authorised by the arbiter shall inspect the player, and shall be of the same gender as the player. If a player refuses to cooperate with these obligations, the arbiter shall take measures in accordance with Article 12.9.
    “The destructive capacity of the individual, however vicious, is small; of the state, however well-intentioned, almost limitless. Expand the state and that destructive capacity necessarily expands, too, pari passu.”—Paul Johnson, Modern Times, 1983.

  2. #32
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    54
    Quote Originally Posted by DontAcceptDraw View Post
    If I completed an illegal move (I moved the rook to a square along a diagonal) and a few move later I used two hands to make a move then Lost my game?
    As I read the new rules it seems quite clear that " it shall be considered as an illegal move." Means that in all situations shall be treated at is was an illegal move. Yes, lost game.
    So even if two hand two hand castling is not an illegal move, it shall be considered as it is illegal. Seems clear that two hands castling and two hands promotion is lost game in blitz and rapid. And as I can see it there are no way to correct the move since you already has used two hands(?)

  3. #33
    Reader in Slood Dynamics Rincewind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The multiverse
    Posts
    21,570
    Quote Originally Posted by Otto View Post
    And as I can see it there are no way to correct the move since you already has used two hands(?)
    Provided you haven't clocked I believe you could restore the position on the board to that prior to the move and then complete the move with one hand and then clock. I believe that would "correct" the illegal move.
    So einfach wie möglich, aber nicht einfacher - Albert Einstein

  4. #34
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    351
    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind View Post
    Provided you haven't clocked I believe you could restore the position on the board to that prior to the move and then complete the move with one hand and then clock. I believe that would "correct" the illegal move.
    This would seem to be a fair way of handling this situation, but 7.7.1 states that the mere act of `making' the move constitutes an illegal move. The move is made once the pieces are released on legitimate squares.

    If a `true' illegal move (e.g. leaving king in check) has been completed by a player previously, and then the same player uses two hands to make a move, then I don't believe this should result in loss of game. There are specific penalties for infractions of 7.7.1, specified in 7.7.2 -- thus 7.7.2 should take precedence.

    Quote Originally Posted by FIDE Laws of Chess, effective from July 2017
    7.7.1
    If a player uses two hands to make a single move (in case of castling, capturing or promotion), it shall be considered as an illegal move.
    7.7.2
    For the first violation of the rule 7.7.1, the arbiter shall give two minutes extra time to his opponent; for the second violation of the rule 7.7.1 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.
    These rules are not clear, and I think they will need to be rewritten at some point. There has been some recent discussion about moves with two hands on another thread (posts #5 onwards concern the new rules): http://www.chesschat.org/showthread....sing-two-hands
    Southern Suburbs Chess Club (Perth)
    www.southernsuburbschessclub.org.au

  5. #35
    Reader in Slood Dynamics Rincewind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The multiverse
    Posts
    21,570
    Quote Originally Posted by Andrew Hardegen View Post
    This would seem to be a fair way of handling this situation, but 7.7.1 states that the mere act of `making' the move constitutes an illegal move. The move is made once the pieces are released on legitimate squares.
    But since the move is illegal is should be correctable so provided they have not completed the move then replacing the pieces unmakes the illegal move and re-moving the pieces with a single hand would make a legal move. Makes sense to me anyway.

    Of course the null move is automatically made when you press the clock without moving. You can't do anything about that and it should be a loss of game.
    So einfach wie möglich, aber nicht einfacher - Albert Einstein

  6. #36
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,865
    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind View Post
    But since the move is illegal is should be correctable so provided they have not completed the move then replacing the pieces unmakes the illegal move and re-moving the pieces with a single hand would make a legal move. Makes sense to me anyway.
    Indeed it might be further argued that since an illegal move cannot be made before it is completed, then the statement that moving with both hands shall be treated as an illegal move means it must also be treated in the same way, and therefore defaulting a player for "making" a move with two hands (when they have not even pressed the clock) is just wrong.

    As the wording is so dreadfully unclear I think it is worth considering the purpose of the rule. The main purpose is to prevent players gaining an unfair advantage on time by using both hands to move, though a further reason for it is to reduce the risk of cheating or pieces being knocked over. The player who uses both hands to "make" a move, then realises their error and reverses the move then replays it with one hand has not gained time - indeed they have lost time and the loss of time should be punishment enough.
    Last edited by Kevin Bonham; 08-05-2017 at 11:23 PM.

  7. #37
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    351
    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind View Post
    But since the move is illegal is should be correctable so provided they have not completed the move then replacing the pieces unmakes the illegal move and re-moving the pieces with a single hand would make a legal move. Makes sense to me anyway.
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Bonham
    Indeed it might be further argued that since an illegal move cannot be made before it is completed, then the statement that moving with both hands shall be treated as an illegal move means it must also be treated in the same way, and therefore defaulting a player for "making" a move with two hands (when they have not even pressed the clock) is just wrong.
    I don't think anyone would argue that a move that is a legal move when played with one hand would be an illegal move when played with both hands. The wording that I used in my previous post, where I wrote that 7.7.1 stated that this constituted an illegal move, was misleading.

    A move made with two hands is not necessarily an illegal move. As such it can be made before the chessclock is pressed. The purpose of 7.7.1 is that it be treated in a similar way, somehow, to a genuinely illegal move. The penalties specified by 7.7.2, similar to those previously reserved for genuinely illegal moves, will apply to breaches of 7.7.1. But 7.7.1 deals with the made move, not the completed move.

    If, as it should be, the intention is to punish the completed two-handed move, rather than the made two-handed move, then a natural way to do this (as I have written in another thread on this topic) would be to delete 7.7.2 entirely. Such occurrences would then be handled by 7.5.1. This would produce the preferred outcome that we are all looking for.
    Southern Suburbs Chess Club (Perth)
    www.southernsuburbschessclub.org.au

  8. #38
    CC FIDE Master
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Christchurch, New Zealand
    Posts
    529
    Would have been easier to create a section for illegal actions and a rule to the effect that a player loses if they make 2 illegal actions or 1 illegal action and 1 illegal move during a game.
    IA Craig Hall

    www.chess.org.nz - Canterbury Chess Club
    http://respectrum.nz - Major sponsor

  9. #39
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    41
    If an arbiter gives a queen a player in his right hand and the player play with his left hand then is this illegal move?
    If I moved the rook to a square along a diagonal with two hands then Is this two illegal moves?
    The only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about.

    FIDE Arbiter: Néstor Echeverría.

  10. #40
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    351
    Quote Originally Posted by DontAcceptDraw View Post
    If an arbiter gives a queen a player in his right hand and the player play with his left hand then is this illegal move?
    I don't think so. My reading is that the player only has to put the queen on the board and remove the pawn with the same hand. The queen does not come into play until it touches the promotion square: the player may transfer it from right to left hand and then make the move using only his left hand.

    If I moved the rook to a square along a diagonal with two hands then Is this two illegal moves?
    An interesting example! I think it is only one move, so it can only be one illegal move. Note that 7.7.1 only applies to captures, promotions and castling. If the move is a capture, I do not know which one of 7.5.1 or 7.7.1 would apply.
    Southern Suburbs Chess Club (Perth)
    www.southernsuburbschessclub.org.au

  11. #41
    CC International Master Jesper Norgaard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    1,002
    Suppose the articles I suggested above were in place:
    3.10 It is not allowed to capture the king of the opponent.
    3.11 A move must be made with one hand only. This is also true when capturing a piece, when castling or when promoting a piece.
    3.12 If a clock is used, it is not allowed to press the clock with one hand, and moving the piece(s) with the other hand in the same move.
    3.13 If a clock is used, it is not allowed to press the clock without making a move, except if the player's previous move had not been completed with a clock press.

    Renumbering of 3.10:
    3.14.1 A move is legal when all the relevant requirements of Articles 3.1 – 3.13 have been fulfilled.
    3.14.2 A move is illegal when it fails to meet the relevant requirements of Articles 3.1 – 3.13
    3.14.3 A position is illegal when it cannot have been reached by any series of legal moves.
    Suppose White intends to castle short with Ke1 and Rh1, but both king and rook have been moved already. White moves the king from e1 to g1 with the left hand and then the rook from h1 to e1 with the right hand, and then with his left hand presses the clock.

    This is a 5-times violation of article 3, but it should still be considered a single illegal move

    1. violation: The king was already moved (3.8.b.1.a)
    2. violation: The rook was already moved (3.8.b.1.b)
    3. violation: The rook was placed on the wrong square e1 instead of f1 (3.8.b)
    4. violation: The pieces were moved with both hands (3.11)
    5. violation: The pieces and the clock were moved with both hands (3.12)

    No matter how many times article 3 is violated, it is only a single illegal move.
    Chess well played is imagination, calculation, observation, experience and memorization in order of importance.

  12. #42
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    351
    Quote Originally Posted by Jesper Norgaard View Post
    Suppose the articles I suggested above were in place:


    Suppose White intends to castle short with Ke1 and Rh1, but both king and rook have been moved already. White moves the king from e1 to g1 with the left hand and then the rook from h1 to e1 with the right hand, and then with his left hand presses the clock.

    This is a 5-times violation of article 3, but it should still be considered a single illegal move

    1. violation: The king was already moved (3.8.b.1.a)
    2. violation: The rook was already moved (3.8.b.1.b)
    3. violation: The rook was placed on the wrong square e1 instead of f1 (3.8.b)
    4. violation: The pieces were moved with both hands (3.11)
    5. violation: The pieces and the clock were moved with both hands (3.12)

    No matter how many times article 3 is violated, it is only a single illegal move.
    If the intention is to view illegal action and illegal move as the same thing, then I think your new Article 3 achieves this very well. But we don't always want to do this.

    There is a case for keeping the rules for competitions separate from the basic rules of chess. Fundamentally, chess is a simple game, after all. Two non-tournament players, playing a friendly game, would not allow diagonal rook moves or leaving one's king in check, but wouldn't necessarily object to using 2 hands for a capture/castling or pressing the chessclock (if used) with the wrong hand. I think this friendly contest should still be called a game of chess, even if various Competition Rules (Articles 6-12) are not upheld.

    Craig Hall suggested creating a new section for illegal actions/moves, which may be similar to what you propose but may also be a good way of keeping the rules for tournament chess separate from the basic rules.
    Southern Suburbs Chess Club (Perth)
    www.southernsuburbschessclub.org.au

  13. #43
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    53
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Bonham View Post
    Indeed it might be further argued that since an illegal move cannot be made before it is completed, then the statement that moving with both hands shall be treated as an illegal move means it must also be treated in the same way, and therefore defaulting a player for "making" a move with two hands (when they have not even pressed the clock) is just wrong.

    As the wording is so dreadfully unclear I think it is worth considering the purpose of the rule. The main purpose is to prevent players gaining an unfair advantage on time by using both hands to move, though a further reason for it is to reduce the risk of cheating or pieces being knocked over. The player who uses both hands to "make" a move, then realises their error and reverses the move then replays it with one hand has not gained time - indeed they have lost time and the loss of time should be punishment enough.
    This subject has been covered during the Arbiters' Commission Lecture on the new Laws of Chess. The Presidential Board intent is that any combination of any 2 infractions from the list will loose the game. The PB don't care that a player could loose the game without a warning, for example by castling with both hands and pressing when castling is illegal or by capturing en passant with both hands with a pinned pawn. The penalty is really for making a move with two hands. In my opinion, taking back your two handed move and replaying it could certainly be considered a disturbance of the opponent.

    Reminder: arbiters are not allowed to notify a player that the move that he has just made is illegal and that he should not press. An arbiter who witness the two handed castling should stop the game before the clock is pressed and give the 2 minutes penalty but cannot tell the player that the intended move is illegal.

    The wording is indeed poor and this has been admitted by the Lecturer. The intent of the Legislator is very clear and arbiters have been instructed to follow the intent, not the poor writing. The text has been sent back to the Rule Commission for improvement of the wording, but nobody knows when the improvements will be made and if we will have to wait 4 years for them to be applied.

  14. #44
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,865
    Quote Originally Posted by Pierre Dénommée View Post
    The Presidential Board intent is that any combination of any 2 infractions from the list will loose the game. The PB don't care that a player could loose the game without a warning, for example by castling with both hands and pressing when castling is illegal or by capturing en passant with both hands with a pinned pawn.
    So a double violation in a single move can lose? Interesting.

    The way the PB have made these rules is arguably unconstitutional. The minuted decisions of the GA on referring matters to the PB were as follows:

    Mr. Makropoulos said that for some issues which deal with things for several
    Commissions’ attention, there needs to be a decision in the next weeks and to come to
    an agreement between various Commissions in order to avoid the creation of chaos. He
    said there will be efforts of coordination and clarification of all issues at the next
    Presidential Board.
    The General Assembly agreed to authorise the Presidential Board to deal with the
    issues which refer to the interaction of several Commissions and approve the other
    Commission Reports after necessary changes.

    Now really the issue was that dealing with all issues involving multiple Commissions would have taken too long because of the relatively small amount of time allowed for the GA and the large amount of time used up by ritual grandstanding about Kirsan. Just like at the previous GA doing the job of the GA properly would have taken too long because of time used up by the extremely cumbersome election process.

    So was this increase of a zero-tolerance approach to illegal actions an issue "which refer to the interaction of several Commissions"? No. No other commission had made recommendations of this sort.

    Was it a "necessary change"? No. The Laws of Chess have done fine without defaulting players for moving with both hands for decades.

    So I would argue that some of the changes the PB has made are technically unauthorised and invalid. But I am sure in practice everyone will just accept them and implement them - as best they can given how badly they've been written - anyway.

  15. #45
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    54
    I have some questions about illegal moves in the new rules

    7.4.1 If a player displaces one or more pieces, he shall re-establish the correct position in his own time
    if a player overturns/displaces one or more pieces and press the clock, is it an illegal move ?
    It seems so....

    7.7.1 If a player uses two hands to make a single move (in case of castling, capturing or promotion), it shall be considered as an illegal move.
    If he move a piece with his right hand, and press the clock with his left hand, is this an illegal move?
    I guess not, since "6.2.3 A player must press his clock with the same hand with which he made his move." is a rule concerning the chess clock, not the move.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Laws of Chess draft changes 2017
    By Kevin Bonham in forum Arbiters' Corner
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 04-03-2017, 03:01 PM
  2. Draft FIDE Laws of Chess 2013
    By Kevin Bonham in forum Arbiters' Corner
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 17-10-2012, 05:10 PM
  3. 2009 Fide laws of chess- current situation
    By Garvinator in forum Arbiters' Corner
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 27-12-2008, 09:06 AM
  4. Upcoming FIDE Laws Of Chess Revision
    By Kevin Bonham in forum Arbiters' Corner
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 22-02-2008, 09:41 PM
  5. 2005 FIDE Laws of Chess on FIDE website finally correct
    By Bill Gletsos in forum Arbiters' Corner
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 09-07-2007, 05:57 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
  •