2005 FIDE Laws of Chess on FIDE website finally correct

[Bill Gletsos]

Back in May whilst in email communication with Stewart Reuben (Secretary of the FIDE Rules Commission as well as numerous other FIDE Commissions) I highlighted to him that there were 13 Articles of the Laws of Chess on the FIDE website that were incorrect and contradicted those officially passed at the 2004 FIDE Congress. He indicated he would forward this on to Geurt.

In mid June I received an email from David Welch, Chief Arbiter of the English Chess Federation informing me that he had received my list of errors from Stewart and that of 4 versions of the Laws he had all were wrong.

I also noticed that in Geurt's June 2007 notebook on Chesscafe that Pierre Dénommée from Canada also raises issues about the Laws on the FIDE website.

In the last couple of days I received an email from Stewart informing me that the corrected version of the Laws of Chess were now available on the FIDE website.

FIDE has a post on their webiste announcing the corrected version.
http://www.fide.com/news.asp?id=1399

[The Snail King]

Good job Bill

[arosar]

So you instigated the whole process Bill?

Oh have you got a sample of the errors?

AR

[Bill Gletsos]

Originally Posted by arosar

So you instigated the whole process Bill?

My email to Stewart was before Geurt's May Arbiter's Notebook on Chesscafe. Pierre's letter to Geurt's column appeared in his June Arbiter's Notebook.
As such I suspect I may have been the first to notice it and raise it but cannot be certain.

Originally Posted by arosar

Oh have you got a sample of the errors?

I'll post the list later tonight.

[Jono]

Originally Posted by Bill Gletsos

As such I suspect I may have been the first to notice it and raise it but cannot be certain.

Good job!

[Bill Gletsos]

Originally Posted by Jono

Good job!

Actually you had a hand in it also.
Back in mid April you quoted from the Laws on the FIDE website in one of your posts and it was from it I realised that the FIDE website was incorrect.

It was from that initial error that I started scrutinisng all the Laws on the FIDE website to see if there were any other errors and was extremely surprised to find so many.

[Kevin Bonham]

It is quite bizarre that FIDE let this happen in the first place, but I guess nothing is really that surprising anymore.

[Bill Gletsos]

The full list of errors I reported were as follows:

Article 1.3 is shown as "It is not allowed to capture the King" where in reality it should be "If the position is such that neither player can possibly checkmate, the game is drawn."

Article 3.7d says "A pawn attacking a square crossed by an opponent`s pawn which has advanced two squares in one move from its original square may capture this opponent`s pawn as though the latter had been moved only one square. This capture is only legal on the move following this advance and is called an `en passant` capture. This move must be made in the event that no other legal move is possible." where as in reality that last sentence is not part of the Laws of Chess.

Article 3.8i says "moving to any adjoining square not attacked by one or more of the opponent`s pieces. The opponent`s pieces are considered to attack a square, even if such pieces are constrained from moving to that square because they would then leave or place their own king in check.

The opponent`s pieces are considered to attack a square, even if such pieces cannot themselves move." where as it should only state "moving to any adjoining square not attacked by one or more of the opponent's pieces."

Article 3.8ii(2) says "Castling is prevented temporarily
a. if the square on which the king stands, or the square which it must cross, or the square which it is to occupy, is attacked by one or more of the opponent`s pieces.

b. if there is any piece between the king and the rook with which castling is to be effected.

c. The king is said to be `check` if it is attacked by one or more of the opponent`s pieces, even if such pieces are constrained from moving to that square because they would then leave or place their own king in check." where in reality that last point c is actually the start of Article 3.9.

Article 3.9 is missing the first sentence which has been made part of Article 3.8ii(2) by mistake.

Article 4.3d says "If a player touched more than one piece simultaneously without a note for J`adoube, and it wasn’t known what piece he touched first, then he must move one of these touched pieces. I.e. he is given the choice to choose which of them he wants to move." when there is in reality no such Article as 4.3d.

Article 4.6 says as "A player forfeits his right to a claim against his opponent`s violation of Article 4.3 or 4.4, once he deliberately touches a piece." when in reality this is Article 4.7.

What should be Article 4.6 is listed as Article 4.7.

Article 7.4a says "If during a game it is found by the arbiter or one of the players that an illegal move, including not exchanging a pawn who reached the last rank for a queen rook, bishop or knight and capturing the opponent’s king, has been completed, the position immediately before the irregularity shall be reinstated. 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 6.14. Article 4.3 applies to the move replacing the illegal move. The game shall then continue from this reinstated position." when it should really be "If during a game it is found that an illegal move, including failing to meet the requirements of the promotion of a pawn or capturing the opponent’s king, has been completed, the position immediately before the irregularity shall be reinstated. 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 6.14. Article 4.3 applies to the move replacing the illegal move.
The game shall then continue from this reinstated position."

Article 7.4b says "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. If the opponent cannot checkmate the player by any possible series of legal moves even with the most unskilled counterplay, the arbiter shall decide the result of the game." whilst in reality the last sentence is not part of the Article at all.

Article 8.1 mentions "Both players must record the offer of a draw on the scoresheet. (Appendix E.12)" when in reality the relevant Article is E.13.

Article 13.7b says "It is forbidden for anybody to use a mobile phone in the playing venue by the arbiter" when it should say "It is forbidden for anybody to use a mobile phone in the playing venue and any area designated by the arbiter".

In Article B5 the second sentence says "The opponent is then entitled to claim that the player made an illegal move before he has touched a piece according to Article 4." when it really is "The opponent is then entitled to claim that the player completed an illegal move before the claimant has made his move."

[Garvinator]

I think the incorrect rules that were displayed on the fide website must have only been uploaded to the website in the recent past, because the rules that Bill has just posted are the ones that I downloaded and copied to a doc file quite a while ago from the fide website.

Maybe the incorrect laws of chess were put on the fide website when their website was down a while ago

[Bill Gletsos]

Originally Posted by ggrayggray

because the rules that Bill has just posted are the ones that I downloaded and copied to a doc file quite a while ago from the fide website.

Do you mean you downloaded the correct set or the incorrect set?

Originally Posted by ggrayggray

Maybe the incorrect laws of chess were put on the fide website when their website was down a while ago

No my investigations show the errors first occurred back between 19th August 2006 and 13th October 2006.

[Garvinator]

Originally Posted by Bill Gletsos

Do you mean you downloaded the correct set or the incorrect set?

I downloaded the correct set.

Originally Posted by Bill Gletsos

No my investigations show the errors first occurred back between 19th August 2006 and 13th October 2006.

I must have downloaded the correct set before August 2006 (if this is possible )

[Bill Gletsos]

Originally Posted by ggrayggray

I downloaded the correct set.

I must have downloaded the correct set before August 2006 (if this is possible )

If by downloading you mean you downloaded the pdf version of the Laws from the FIDE website then as far as I can determine they were always correct (with the exception of a couple of incorrect cross-references). It was the HTML pages that were in error from the period I indicated.