PDA

View Full Version : clarification needed: what is a move?



qpawn
18-03-2006, 05:55 PM
Today in the tourney I played in my opponent moved a piece to a square with his hand still touching it, and then moved the piece back to its original square? Is this allowed?

What exactly constitutes a move under the FIDE laws? When is a move deemed to have been completed such that I have the right to enforce it if the opponent moves the piece back?

And if someone does infringe the rule and moves back against the laws then when should I act upon it? Duringthe game? Afterwards in writing or what?

noswonky
18-03-2006, 06:02 PM
Today in the tourney I played in my opponent moved a piece to a square with his hand still touching it, and then moved the piece back to its original square? Is this allowed?


If he didn't let go of it, he doesn't have to move it to that square. But having touched it, he must move that piece somewhere.

Trent Parker
18-03-2006, 06:02 PM
Your opponent has not broken a rule as long as he makes a move with that piece.

A move is deemed to have been made when the picture is released from the hand onto a different square than what it was on.

You have the right to force the move when the opponent no longer touches the piece..... will find relevant section......

Claim during the game. the arbiter will force the player to make a legal move with that piece.

If you try to do something after the event it will not be acted upon.

qpawn
18-03-2006, 06:28 PM
Thanks for that !

Bill Gletsos
18-03-2006, 06:43 PM
Your opponent has not broken a rule as long as he makes a move with that piece.

A move is deemed to have been made when the picture is released from the hand onto a different square than what it was on.

You have the right to force the move when the opponent no longer touches the piece..... will find relevant section......

Claim during the game. the arbiter will force the player to make a legal move with that piece.

If you try to do something after the event it will not be acted upon.The laws are even more stringent than that.

4.7 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.

qpawn
18-03-2006, 09:26 PM
Look, having thought more about this the following chess strategem appears perfectly legal:

Say you are in a queen and pawn endgame. The opponent's queen has heaps of squres to go to. So he touches his queen and moves it from a4 to a1. Then he leaves his hand on the piece, looks about for all the combinations and moves the piece back to a4. Then he moves the piece to a8 to see what the blazes is going on if he moves to that sqaure. Then he...well you get the idea.

If that isn't cheating it's damn close to it. I don't recommend it for a second; I don't do any of it. But some smart alec individual could spend 15 minutes of clock time doing that. :lol:

The only cold comfort I can take from it if my opponents do this is that if they need to use this "look see " loophole then they are pretty dense. :D

arosar
18-03-2006, 09:36 PM
It's a poor strategy. The opponent can simply invoke the "distractions" rule and that's it. You can stop him from doing that.

AR

noswonky
18-03-2006, 10:47 PM
Say you are in a queen and pawn endgame. The opponent's queen has heaps of squres to go to. So he touches his queen and moves it from a4 to a1. Then he leaves his hand on the piece, looks about for all the combinations and moves the piece back to a4. Then he moves the piece to a8 to see what the blazes is going on if he moves to that sqaure. Then he...well you get the idea.

If that isn't cheating it's damn close to it. I don't recommend it for a second; I don't do any of it. But some smart alec individual could spend 15 minutes of clock time doing that. :lol:

The only cold comfort I can take from it if my opponents do this is that if they need to use this "look see " loophole then they are pretty dense. :D

I've seen Kasparov do it - but that was blitz.

qpawn
19-03-2006, 07:33 AM
Where is the rule about distractions in the fIDE laws? :eek:

arosar
19-03-2006, 08:20 AM
12.6 mate.

AR

Denis_Jessop
19-03-2006, 11:33 AM
Today in the tourney I played in my opponent moved a piece to a square with his hand still touching it, and then moved the piece back to its original square? Is this allowed?

What exactly constitutes a move under the FIDE laws? When is a move deemed to have been completed such that I have the right to enforce it if the opponent moves the piece back?

And if someone does infringe the rule and moves back against the laws then when should I act upon it? Duringthe game? Afterwards in writing or what?

I see that no one has fully answered qpawn's questions.

Regarding the first two paras the situation is that a piece deliberately touched must be moved (Arts 4.3, 4.4). A piece may be touched, moved to another square and then replaced on its original square if the piece has not been released on the new square. But that piece must be moved. A player forfeits the right to enforce this rule if he deliberately touches a piece (Art 4.7) [This could happen if player A touches one piece but moves another and player B then touches a piece to move it but tries, before moving, to complain of A's touched piece infringement.] Under Art 4.6 a piece once moved to, and released on, a certain square cannot be moved to another. The move is considered to have been made when all the relevant requirements of Art 3 (The moves of the pieces) have been fulfilled. Note that the provisions of Art 4.7 do not apply to an Art 4.6 situation. Most of these points, but not those that follow, have already been made by other posters.

Now to address the questions in the final para. If a player makes a move and releases the piece on another square but then takes the piece back and moves it somewhere else, the correct thing to do is to stop the clock and summon the arbiter. The practical thing to do is to point the error out to the opponent and ask him to correct it but this has its dangers, first, because talking to the opponent is not a good idea (you could be accused of distraction) and, secondly, if your opponent is the sort of person who would do that sort of thing, you are likely to get involved in an argument and the arbiter will have to come and settle that down as well. If you wait until after the game to raise the matter, it will be too late, as complaints of this kind must be raised before the completion of the game. Once the game is concluded the result stands.

On the matter of moving a piece to several squares but not releasing it, not only could this be considered distraction (Art 12.6) but also, arguably, an infringement of Art 12.2a - using a source of information. I know of at least one player who does this kind of thing fairly often and he is not dense, rather devious instead.

DJ

qpawn
19-03-2006, 03:01 PM
That's quite the best answer; thanks for that.

Another question that comes to mind is this one. I tend to slide the pieces across the board rathre than pick them up and plonk them down. I know that this doesn't do the board/table any good [ I can see all arbiters in VIC shuddering now :D ] but that's just too bad; I like to slide 'em unless of course something is in the way as in a knight move. But what if I was sliding along and accidentally let go of the piece on a sqaure. I assume that under the rules if that made a legal move then I am stuck with it :mad: I gotta coat my fingers in pig fat before every gameto make those pieces stick :P

Denis_Jessop
19-03-2006, 08:52 PM
That's quite the best answer; thanks for that.

Another question that comes to mind is this one. I tend to slide the pieces across the board rathre than pick them up and plonk them down. I know that this doesn't do the board/table any good [ I can see all arbiters in VIC shuddering now :D ] but that's just too bad; I like to slide 'em unless of course something is in the way as in a knight move. But what if I was sliding along and accidentally let go of the piece on a sqaure. I assume that under the rules if that made a legal move then I am stuck with it :mad: I gotta coat my fingers in pig fat before every gameto make those pieces stick :P

I'd be surprised if an arbiter made you move the piece to a square if doing so had been clearly accidental. I wouldn't if it happened in an event in which I was the arbiter. By analogy, if you were to pick up the piece instead and accidentally drop it, no sensible arbiter would say that the piece was moved to the square on which it accidentally fell and came to rest. Art 4.6 speaks of a piece having been "released" on a square. In my opinion that indicates the need for a deliberate act, and an accident would not be covered by that term in that context.

DJ