An undetermined square

[DENTONCHESS]

say a player, for example purposes, playing white when his opponent playing black moves his queen from d2 to the corner of e1, e2, and d1, with the queen about equal in these
squares, and the original d2, and punches his clock. His opponent with a second left, runs
out of time. For discussion purposes, the player playing white calls the TD to the board,
claiming black did not make a legal move before touching the clock. What would the ruling
and penalty be. needless to say, black is claiming a win on time.

Rob Jones

[William_H_Stokes]

@DENTONCHESS

say a player, for example purposes, playing white when his opponent playing black moves his queen from d2 to the corner of e1, e2, and d1, with the queen about equal in these
squares, and the original d2, and punches his clock. His opponent with a second left, runs
out of time. For discussion purposes, the player playing white calls the TD to the board,
claiming black did not make a legal move before touching the clock. What would the ruling
and penalty be. needless to say, black is claiming a win on time.

Rob Jones

Sad to say…this is an example where time delay should have been used. Did Black record the intended square? Even so, the ambiguous placement of the king most likely would result in a time forfeit claim being disallowed.

[DENTONCHESS]

@William H Stokes

@DENTONCHESS

say a player, for example purposes, playing white when his opponent playing black moves his queen from d2 to the corner of e1, e2, and d1, with the queen about equal in these
squares, and the original d2, and punches his clock. His opponent with a second left, runs
out of time. For discussion purposes, the player playing white calls the TD to the board,
claiming black did not make a legal move before touching the clock. What would the ruling
and penalty be. needless to say, black is claiming a win on time.

Rob Jones

Sad to say…this is an example where time delay should have been used. Did Black record the intended square? Even so, the ambiguous placement of the king most likely would result in a time forfeit claim being disallowed.

It was a queen,but I think that was what you meant. But yes, disallow the time forfeit claim, but a. does the TD add time for the opponent, and b. could white be penalized for
a lack of sportsmanship??

Rob Jones

[Crume]

No telling if delay was used.

It would seem “by the book” that White loses b/c he couldn’t get the clock stopped to make the claim. He can’t get his second back (16R - no time adjustment for reinstated position). The rules don’t require clock stoppage and use phrases like “should” and “may.” All in all it’s simply a good idea so there is no question of time.

If the TD is present and White says, “illegal move” while reaching to stop the clocks (or pressing buttons trying to stop it)…and while reaching the second ticks off…I could see how the TD would rule in favor of White and give him two minutes. In that case White made the claim “on his own time.” That’s a stretch though and it would be good to have witnesses who interpret the actions similarly.

Edited to correct white/black references.

[BobMessenger]

The rulebook isn’t entirely clear on what constitutes an illegal move. In my opinion, putting a piece on the intersection of squares where it’s not clear which square the piece is on isn’t a move at all but a piece displacement. Rule 11C covers accidental piece displacement. Giving Black the benefit of the doubt I’ll assume the piece displacement was accidental and not deliberate.

Rule 11C says, “If, during a game, one or more pieces have been accidentally displaced and incorrectly replaced, then the displacement shall be treated as an illegal move.” That doesn’t apply in this case because the piece hasn’t been replaced, i.e. placed unambiguously on a square.

Rule 11C goes on to say, “If during the course of a move, a player inadvertently knocks over one or more pieces, that player must not press the clock until the position has been reestablished. The opponent may press the clock without moving, if necessary, to force the player who knocked over the piece(s) to restore the position on his or her own time.”

True, Black didn’t knock over the queen, but I would apply rule 1A: “Most problems concerning rules that may arise during a chess game are covered in this book. However, the rules of chess cannot and should not regulate all possible situations. In situations not explicitly covered, the tournament director can usually reach a fair decision by considering similar cases and applying their principles analogously.” In my opinion, Black’s ambiguous move of the queen is analogous to knocking the queen over.

Rule 11C says White can press the clock without moving in order to force Black to restore the position on his or her own time - small comfort in this case since White’s flag is down. So does White lose? Not necessarily. Rule 11C says that a player must not press the clock until the position has been reestablished [my emphasis]. Black violated this rule when he pressed the clock. What is the penalty for this violation of the rules?

Here I think reasonable people can disagree. Rule 1C2a says “Except where specifically noted in the rules, the standard penalty assessed by the director is to add two unused minutes to the remaining time of the opponent of the player not following the rules of chess.” Rule 1C2b says “Except where specifically noted in the rules, the director may assess penalties either more or less severe than the standard penalty (1C2a).” I can see three possible rulings: (a) the rulebook specifically notes that the penalty for pressing the clock after accidentally displacing a piece is that the opponent can press the clock without moving, so there is no time adjustment and White loses on time; (b) add two minutes to White’s remaining time under rule 1C2a; (c) impose a different penalty under rule 1C2b.

As I see it, the provision in 11C that the opponent of a player who displaces pieces and presses the clock without replacing them may press the clock without moving is not a penalty. It simply says that the player must replace the pieces on his own time, but doesn’t preclude the director from imposing a penalty in addition to this.

Adding two minutes to White’s clock is a possibility, but I would prefer a ruling to restore equity to the situation, considering that White was down to one second on the clock before Black made the ambiguous move/piece displacement: I would put one second on White’s clock under rule 1C2b, put the queen back on d2, and start Black’s clock.

[Crume]

White’s flag fell. This is why players are instructed to stop the clocks to make a claim. You could lose on time while trying to make the cliam.

11C is flimsy. There is no accidental displacement or knocking pieces about. At least 11C stipulates that such a move should also be treated as an illegal move. So we’re back to illegal move vs. flag fall.

The omissions of 11D1 (Illegal move in sudden death time pressure) could suggest that a flag fall is not enough to overcome an illegal move. Time forfeit is not one of the conditions listed in which “…the illegal move stands and there is no time adjustment if the game is still in progress.” It’s that pesky “…still in progress.” part that is a bummer for White. His flag fell. The game is over if Black has a valid time claim.

If Black were attempting to blitz his opponent and win on time rather than on the board, the move could be treated as a deliberate illegal move (11J). Completely up to the judgement of a TD who was there.

Adding two minutes to White’s clock is a possibility, but I would prefer a ruling to restore equity to the situation, considering that White was down to one second on the clock before Black made the ambiguous move/piece displacement: I would put one second on White’s clock under rule 1C2b, put the queen back on d2, and start Black’s clock.

Directly contradicted by 16R (No time adjustment for reinstated position).

Without any atmospheric information that indicates a deliberate illegal move, White loses.

[BobMessenger]

@Crume

@BobMessenger

Adding two minutes to White’s clock is a possibility, but I would prefer a ruling to restore equity to the situation, considering that White was down to one second on the clock before Black made the ambiguous move/piece displacement: I would put one second on White’s clock under rule 1C2b, put the queen back on d2, and start Black’s clock.

Directly contradicted by 16R (No time adjustment for reinstated position).

16R applies to illegal moves. In my opinion, queen to the intersection of d1, e1, d2 and e2 is not any kind of move at all, legal or illegal. It’s a piece displacement.

[Crume]

@BobMessenger

@Crume

@BobMessenger

Adding two minutes to White’s clock is a possibility, but I would prefer a ruling to restore equity to the situation, considering that White was down to one second on the clock before Black made the ambiguous move/piece displacement: I would put one second on White’s clock under rule 1C2b, put the queen back on d2, and start Black’s clock.

Directly contradicted by 16R (No time adjustment for reinstated position).

16R applies to illegal moves. In my opinion, queen to the intersection of d1, e1, d2 and e2 is not any kind of move at all, legal or illegal. It’s a piece displacement.

At this point I will assume we’re OK realizing that the flag fall ended the game and that the illegal move didn’t have precedence.

So to the illegal move discussion. Bold emphasis added to make it clear. 16R applies to 11C.

11C. Accidental piece displacement. If, during a game, one or more pieces have been accidentally displaced and incorrectly replaced, then the displacement shall be treated as an illegal move. If, during the course of a move, a player inadvertently knocks over one or more pieces, that player must not press the clock until the position has been reestablished. The opponent may press the clock without moving, if necessary, to force the player who knocked over the piece( s) to restore the position on his or her own time. If possible, clocks with move counters should be readjusted.

If a completed “move” is not legal…then how is it not illegal?

[BobMessenger]

@Crume

At this point I will assume we’re OK realizing that the flag fall ended the game and that the illegal move didn’t have precedence.

As I see it, the flag fall did not end the game and there was no illegal move. Black improperly pressed the clock after displacing a piece.

@Crume

So to the illegal move discussion. Bold emphasis added to make it clear. 16R applies to 11C.

11C. Accidental piece displacement. If, during a game, one or more pieces have been accidentally displaced and incorrectly replaced, then the displacement shall be treated as an illegal move. If, during the course of a move, a player inadvertently knocks over one or more pieces, that player must not press the clock until the position has been reestablished. The opponent may press the clock without moving, if necessary, to force the player who knocked over the piece( s) to restore the position on his or her own time. If possible, clocks with move counters should be readjusted.

If a completed “move” is not legal…then how is it not illegal?

I addressed this in my earlier post. The first sentence in 11C is not applicable because Black did not replace the displaced piece, i.e. he did not put the queen unambiguously on a square before pressing the clock. His displacement of the queen was not an illegal move because it wasn’t a move.

[Mulfish]

1C2 does give the TD some flexibility. I’m not a TD or a chess lawyer, but it seems to me that intentional or not black has gained an unfair advantage by his failure to put his queen on an actual square, and a TD should have discretion to make sure he is not rewarded for that. My initial reaction was to give white 2 minutes, but Bob Messenger’s argument that he shouldn’t receive a significant benefit from black’s carelessness is persuasive. If I was convinced it was intentional, I would still consider 2 minutes. But absent that sort of evidence, setting white’s clock for 1 second and starting black’s clock does come closest to restoring the status quo.

Now a fresh question from all this. If the game is resumed, is Black compelled to move his queen to one of the squares in question, or would he then be free to move his queen someplace else?

[mfschulte]

@BobMessenger

@Crume

At this point I will assume we’re OK realizing that the flag fall ended the game and that the illegal move didn’t have precedence.

As I see it, the flag fall did not end the game and there was no illegal move. Black improperly pressed the clock after displacing a piece.

@Crume

So to the illegal move discussion. Bold emphasis added to make it clear. 16R applies to 11C.

11C. Accidental piece displacement. If, during a game, one or more pieces have been accidentally displaced and incorrectly replaced, then the displacement shall be treated as an illegal move. If, during the course of a move, a player inadvertently knocks over one or more pieces, that player must not press the clock until the position has been reestablished. The opponent may press the clock without moving, if necessary, to force the player who knocked over the piece( s) to restore the position on his or her own time. If possible, clocks with move counters should be readjusted.

If a completed “move” is not legal…then how is it not illegal?

I addressed this in my earlier post. The first sentence in 11C is not applicable because Black did not replace the displaced piece, i.e. he did not put the queen unambiguously on a square before pressing the clock. His displacement of the queen was not an illegal move because it wasn’t a move.

Couldn’t you argue that not replacing the piece on its original square counts as incorrect replacement? (I know, for instance, that when my students leave a question blank on a test, I still mark it incorrect. It seems like no action to correct is an incorrect action.)

Then even if it wasn’t a move, you would treat it as an illegal move according to that rule.

[Crume]

Given this discussion…we’re all assuming it’s Regular/Dual/Quick rated…the discussion takes a turn if this is a blitz game (Blitz 7e).

@BobMessenger

@Crume

At this point I will assume we’re OK realizing that the flag fall ended the game and that the illegal move didn’t have precedence.

As I see it, the flag fall did not end the game and there was no illegal move. Black improperly pressed the clock after displacing a piece.

What evidence is available to suggest that Black “displaced” the piece? It seems very clear that he picked up the Queen and placed it smack in the middle of squares. That is an incorrectly placed piece. It doesn’t comply with the rules of chess. Noncompliance means an illegal move. An incorrectly placed piece is an illegal move.

@BobMessenger

@Crume

So to the illegal move discussion. Bold emphasis added to make it clear. 16R applies to 11C.

11C. Accidental piece displacement. If, during a game, one or more pieces have been accidentally displaced and incorrectly replaced, then the displacement shall be treated as an illegal move. If, during the course of a move, a player inadvertently knocks over one or more pieces, that player must not press the clock until the position has been reestablished. The opponent may press the clock without moving, if necessary, to force the player who knocked over the piece( s) to restore the position on his or her own time. If possible, clocks with move counters should be readjusted.

If a completed “move” is not legal…then how is it not illegal?

I addressed this in my earlier post. The first sentence in 11C is not applicable because Black did not replace the displaced piece, i.e. he did not put the queen unambiguously on a square before pressing the clock. His displacement of the queen was not an illegal move because it wasn’t a move.

Black’s queen left its origination square and was placed among the juncture of other squares. Black then pressed the clock. Move determination (even if ambiguous) and move completion has occurred. It did not comply with the rules of chess and thus is an illegal move.

All of this is moot of course, because the flag fall took precedence.

@Mulfish

1C2 does give the TD some flexibility. I’m not a TD or a chess lawyer, but it seems to me that intentional or not black has gained an unfair advantage by his failure to put his queen on an actual square, and a TD should have discretion to make sure he is not rewarded for that. My initial reaction was to give white 2 minutes, but Bob Messenger’s argument that he shouldn’t receive a significant benefit from black’s carelessness is persuasive. If I was convinced it was intentional, I would still consider 2 minutes. But absent that sort of evidence, setting white’s clock for 1 second and starting black’s clock does come closest to restoring the status quo.

So far no one has proposed a rule that supports resetting the clocks.

[BobMessenger]

@Mulfish

Now a fresh question from all this. If the game is resumed, is Black compelled to move his queen to one of the squares in question, or would he then be free to move his queen someplace else?

Interesting question. At the risk of using rule 1A as a license to write my own version of the rulebook, I’d say that since Black clearly intended to move his queen to e1, e2 or d1 and took his hand off the piece he has to move his queen to one of those squares.

[BobMessenger]

@mfschulte

Couldn’t you argue that not replacing the piece on its original square counts as incorrect replacement? (I know, for instance, that when my students leave a question blank on a test, I still mark it incorrect. It seems like no action to correct is an incorrect action.)

Then even if it wasn’t a move, you would treat it as an illegal move according to that rule.

That’s too Zen-like for me. To me, in order for a replacement to be incorrect there has to be a replacement, which there wasn’t in this case.

As I said earlier, the rulebook isn’t precisely clear about what constitutes an illegal move. For example, if Black picked up his queen from d2, put it back on d2, and then pressed the clock, would that be considered an illegal move? I would say no, it wasn’t an illegal move, it was an improper clock press.

[BobMessenger]

@Crume

Given this discussion…we’re all assuming it’s Regular/Dual/Quick rated…the discussion takes a turn if this is a blitz game (Blitz 7e).

Actually I think blitz rule 9 would apply (accidental piece displacement.) Otherwise a player who made an ambiguous move would lose the game.

@Crume

What evidence is available to suggest that Black “displaced” the piece? It seems very clear that he picked up the Queen and placed it smack in the middle of squares. That is an incorrectly placed piece. It doesn’t comply with the rules of chess. Noncompliance means an illegal move. An incorrectly placed piece is an illegal move.

I disagree. Rule 7A says “With the exception of castling (8A2) and promotion of a pawn (8F6), a move is the transfer of a piece from one square to another square that is either vacant or occupied by an opponent’s piece.” Under this definition, moving the queen to the intersection of e1, e2, d1 and d2 is not a move. As I interpret the rules, if it’s not a move it’s not an illegal move.

Unfortunately I’ll have to bow out of the discussion at this point, at least for now, because it’s taken up too much of my time. This is a situation not directly covered by the rules, so it’s understandable that different TDs would make different rulings about it.

[Mulfish]

Au contraire, Crume. Mr. Messenger did suggest 1C2. You may not agree with him, but it has been proposed. And I’m inclined to agree with it. Under the interpretation that the flag has fallen so the game is over, the conclusion would be that you can get away with almost anything if your opponent can’t protest fast enough. Seems to me there was a game in the US Championship years ago where a player made an illegal move (might even have happened twice) and his opponent flagged. The TDs were well aware that giving anything more than a few seconds would guarantee a win for the offended party. I don’t recall exactly what they did, but I think it was more in tune with Mr. Messenger’s suggestion which tried to preserve the status quo. They definitely did not allow the flagfall to stand.

[Crume]

@BobMessenger

@Crume

Given this discussion…we’re all assuming it’s Regular/Dual/Quick rated…the discussion takes a turn if this is a blitz game (Blitz 7e).

Actually I think blitz rule 9 would apply (accidental piece displacement.) Otherwise a player who made an ambiguous move would lose the game.

@Crume

What evidence is available to suggest that Black “displaced” the piece? It seems very clear that he picked up the Queen and placed it smack in the middle of squares. That is an incorrectly placed piece. It doesn’t comply with the rules of chess. Noncompliance means an illegal move. An incorrectly placed piece is an illegal move.

I disagree. Rule 7A says “With the exception of castling (8A2) and promotion of a pawn (8F6), a move is the transfer of a piece from one square to another square that is either vacant or occupied by an opponent’s piece.” Under this definition, moving the queen to the intersection of e1, e2, d1 and d2 is not a move. As I interpret the rules, if it’s not a move it’s not an illegal move.

Unfortunately I’ll have to bow out of the discussion at this point, at least for now, because it’s taken up too much of my time. This is a situation not directly covered by the rules, so it’s understandable that different TDs would make different rulings about it.

That all works if one believes this is about piece displacement as opposed to an illegal move. We disagree on the fundamental issue of how to categorize black’s action.

[Crume]

@Mulfish

Au contraire, Crume. Mr. Messenger did suggest 1C2. You may not agree with him, but it has been proposed. And I’m inclined to agree with it. Under the interpretation that the flag has fallen so the game is over, the conclusion would be that you can get away with almost anything if your opponent can’t protest fast enough. Seems to me there was a game in the US Championship years ago where a player made an illegal move (might even have happened twice) and his opponent flagged. The TDs were well aware that giving anything more than a few seconds would guarantee a win for the offended party. I don’t recall exactly what they did, but I think it was more in tune with Mr. Messenger’s suggestion which tried to preserve the status quo. They definitely did not allow the flagfall to stand.

Respectfully, contraire yourself Mulfish. Making a decision “because it sounds equitable” doesn’t make it repeatable for future TDs. Backing up the game injures the player who had the legitimate claim.

Messenger proposes to back up the game through 1C2 by way of a displaced piece and that it “wasn’t a move.” He makes a judgement call that 11C doesn’t apply (thus the displacement is not illegal and carries no penalties). He claims displaced piece “because the rules don’t tell me what an illegal move is” (paraphrased; as an aside, that is a curious thing to read from an ANTD). To back up the game, he has also decided to deny Black’s time claim. There is no reason to deny Black’s time claim.

The crux of the situation is that there are two claims. The claims have to be ruled on (yes, denying is a ruling). Win for Black on his time claim, or 2 minutes for White on his illegal move claim. It is unfathomable to me how a TD could deny both, which is what Bob has proposed. We’ve had an extensive debate on whether the move in question was legal, illegal, or somehow neither; whatever it is, if it doesn’t overrule the flag then how can anyone correctly deny Black’s time claim?

If the US Championship game were years ago, it was likely played under different rules. Just for kicks, let’s assume the rules were the same. Rather than a displaced piece you’ve said the moves made were illegal and everyone knew it. Illegal moves in sudden death time pressure have explicit consequences but have to be called by the player. Whatever happened, happened, but if there was a claim made about the illegal move then the TDs would have needed to give 2 minutes to the offended party. I can’t do anything about long-past TDs who don’t decide to enforce the rules.

While we’re telling old stories…this whole situation reminds me of an incident at the Dallas Chess Club many years ago. A game (with delay) ended acrimoniously in a clock bashing finish. Senior TD Luis Salinas correctly did not point out any of the illegal moves or the flag fall and instead waited for the players to make the claims. Later I asked him what the right call would have been if he had received claims from both players. He didn’t think much and quickly replied, “Whichever claim is first–that’s the one you rule on.”

[Mulfish]

I was only “contrairing” your assertion that no rule had been proposed to support resetting the clocks. On any other facet of this discussion, as a non-TD I am not as well qualified as anyone else involved in the discussion.

Your point on that old US Championship being played under different rules is no doubt valid. As a precedent that the TD has the flexibility to make the equitable decision, however, it is relevant. Whatever rules were in force at that time, the rulebook didn’t have anything clearcut and the TD used judgment. This will always be so.

As to your quote from NTD Salinas, it’s a little unclear. White may (or may not) have asserted his foul claim before Black called flag. If that’s what he meant by “first”, he might have ruled on white’s claim first. On the other hand, the flag fall almost certainly occurred first, so from that angle, that gets the first ruling. But even then the assertion that black made an illegal move (or at least did something improper) would seem to be a defense a reasonable TD might consider in ruling on the flag fall. Evidently you would not. Bob Messenger would. As he said, this is a difficult case and reasonable TDs could differ in their handling. I prefer his approach.

[martinak]

@Mulfish

On the other hand, the flag fall almost certainly occurred first, so from that angle, that gets the first ruling.

In 5th edition, 13C1: “it is considered fallen only when either player points this out.”; and 16E: “The flag is considered down when either player points this out.”

So until the time forfeit claim, it is considered up and if the illegal move claim was made first, it would be ruled on before the time forfeit was considered.