I agree, but perhaps this whole area needs to be thought out a bit more by FIDE.
My two cents:
Player A should not be required to wait until player B has pressed the clock, before player A makes another move. Completion of the move on the board (by player B) should be the only prerequisite.
Nevertheless, B should be entitled to a clock press. This means that B should still be allowed to press the clock, even if A has made another move and executed a “futile” clock press.
This, in turn, should mean that A must be vigilant enough to notice that B pressed the clock even though B is now once again on move. (Failure of such vigilance, and the negative impact thereof on A, can be viewed as an appropriate consequence for A’s jumping the gun in the first place.)
Player A should then, of course, be entitled to a “real” clock press in response to B’s late clock press.
What do you think of that idea, Baba Looey? Second question: How much of this is already the FIDE rule?
All of this holds true for both the FIDE Laws of Chess (all time controls, not just blitz) and for the US Chess blitz rules (which redefine “completion” of a legal move to allow this).
I’ve had this claim (“he’s moving before I pressed the clock”) twice in blitz. It led to some very heated arguments. I’m glad I wasn’t the chief TD for this one. I think both players who made the claim withdrew from the tournament afterwards in disgust. It’s one of the reasons I strongly prefer G/3;+2 as it is much calmer.
I’ve also had this claim numerous times in regular chess at the National Scholastics. But, those are frivolous.
I’m confused. Does “had this claim” mean that a player is claiming that the opponent is moving after the player has determined his move but before the player has completed the move by pressing the clock? If so, does “those are frivolous” mean that the player is incorrect about the facts? If the player is indeed correct about the facts, I would not consider the claim frivolous. The opponent is not on the move until the player has completed his move. (Yes, taken literally, this does mean that the opponent of a player who has forgotten to press the clock is not allowed to move until the player remembers to press the clock. However, if the opponent has waited a reasonable period of time, I would certainly not consider a penalty if the player complained. And, if the player doesn’t complain (as is likely), then the TD is not involved.)
If I am thinking of the same situation then the claim was being made after the clock had been unpressed for at least 15 seconds (it was not an increment time control).
In regular OTB chess, I tend towards the opinion that a player should do NOTHING on the board until their opponent has COMPLETED their move.
But, this changes when a significant amount of time elapses. Exactly how much time is a judgement call.
Alas, there are cases of scholastic coaches instructing their players to NOT press their clock…wait for the opponent to move, and then make a claim. Theses claims should be denied with extreme prejudice (and the coaches should be taken out behind the barn and shot).
In USCF play, there is one wrinkle. There are things that can (but perhaps should not) be done in the time between determining and completing a move. For example - it is legal (but deprecated) to make your move on the board AND THEN claim a draw by 3-fold occurrence of the position. A devious opponent wanting to avoid the claim might make a move before the claim can be made.
There are also situations where the move is determined, but the player on move still has work to do in order to produce a legal position on the board. (examples - mid castling, or mid-promotion - if the player places a Q on the 8th rank AND THEN removes the P on the 7th, this is now accepted as proper, but the move is DETERMINED as soon as the Q touches the board).
In Blitz, things may be different. But, even there, I would caution any player who tries to move while the player on move is still handling pieces on the board.
Yes, the player’s “claim” is that the player has already made his move, but it has not been completed by pressing the clock and the opponent moved a piece. In other words the opponent moved while the player’s clock was still running and during that period between determination and completion.
In blitz, that in between period is very short but many times the opponent still manages to make his move then. In regular chess this usually happens when the player forgets to press the clock and the opponent didn’t realize it. Thinking it was now his turn, he moved. Perhaps even presses the clock only to realize that it hadn’t been switched his way yet.
Well, 6B says “A player is said to be on move or to have the move when the opponent’s move has been completed.” As far as I know, nowhere does it address moving during the in between period of determination and completion. The closest perhaps is blitz rule 6d. “Each player must always be allowed to press the clock after their move is made.” And that’s really more about keeping your hand away from the clock. There’s already another rule for that.
If it’s not illegal, then it’s at least improper. Common practice is to allow it. Realistically it’s only an issue in blitz - d0 blitz anyway.
It does bring up an interesting can of worms, though. Touch move is not enforced when you are not on move. 10B explicitly refers to a “player on move”. So, if a player improperly moves when he is not officially “on move”, is he allowed to take his move back and do something else when he does become “on move”?
I would say no and just make an extension of the “in between determination and completion” period until both clocks have been pressed. The practical matter is there would be too many arguments and complications if a player could legally take back what would otherwise be a valid move.
US Chess blitz rule 15 explicitly defines a legal move as completed “when the hand leaves the piece.” That is why it is legal in blitz for the opponent to move before the player has pressed the clock.
But then it is also legal for the first player to still press the clock, right? Then the opponent would have to notice this, and press the clock yet again. Otherwise the opponent’s clock would be running even though it is the first player’s move.
It’s good when a rule makes the punishment inherent in the crime. In this case the opponent jumped the gun, and is punished by having to notice that he needs to press the clock again, or suffer loss of time if he doesn’t notice.
The player’s late clock press (in response to the opponent’s gun-jumping) also has the advantage of restoring the increment time that both players would otherwise have been deprived of.
Allowing a late clock press also makes life easier for the TD. If a player complains that his opponent is jumping the gun, the TD needs only to say “it’s legal for your opponent to do that, but then you can still press your clock anyway.” No need for any further warnings, clock adjustments, etc.
So, what’s likely to happen in practice (at least until both players familiarize themselves with the rules) is:
First, an opponent will move before the player presses his clock.
Then, the player will fetch the TD and raise holy hail.
Next, the TD will explain to the player that the opponent is allowed to jump the gun, but that the player can still press the clock even though the player is on the move again.
Eventually, both players will figure out that jumping the gun may be harmful to the player doing it.