Does this mean players who touch the Rook first when castling are not allowed to castle and must move the Rook instead?
That’s the main rule as of January 1st 2015, but there is a variation which is the same as the current rule (may castle with the rook first) which doesn’t have to be announced in advance publicity, but should be announced before the first round. In other words, it’s up to the organizer or director to decide which rule to use.
You mean “should be announced before the first round” the same way the paper scoresheet variation and the hands-off illegal move variation “should be” announced?
Yes, I would say that’s a fair comparison. One difference, though, is that this variation explicitly says that it should be announced before the first round while the others don’t.
The main thing from my point of view is that this rules change moves us closer to the FIDE rule without making it mandatory on organizers/directors who prefer the old rule. Maybe eventually we can go all the way and get rid of the variation. That’s a decision for a future Board of Delegates.
I’m glad the variation was approved with a announcement that probably should have been “must” be announced before the first round. Lets say I show up to your tournament in January expecting the new rule to be enforced for castling. You choose to use the old rule/new variation. As originally proposed, with no need for announcement of the variation, how would I know WHICH rule was being used until I castled? How would anyone know which rule was being used unless it was announced?
Mike
Precisely. This is one rule that should be all or nothing, since it can determine game results. At the least, the variation should be a Big Deal, requiring notice in all advance publicity, etc.
Not that either way is inherently better. I have no strong feelings on that, could argue either side—but pick one or the other. Either touching the Rook first is a touch-move violation or it is not.
Most of us, who have played very few or no events under FIDE rules and who were taught that under USCF rules you should touch the King first, but it’s not really a big deal…have never made or witnessed a touch-move claim about castling.
That will change now. Probably it will not happen often, but when it does happen it won’t be fun. I know a few players who touch the Rook first by habit. Not many—but a few. They are the ones who should know about this change before it takes effect. We shall see.
My intuitive prediction: In adult chess, the ones who forget will be older class players who find it difficult to overcome a lifetime habit of grabbing the rook first. Those who call them on it will be younger rule mavens. As you note, it won’t be fun. And, despite all the sermonizing about “knowing the rules”, it will be a prime example of very poor sportsmanship.
If the variation had said “Use of this variation does not need to be announced in advance publicity” it would have still have been subject to rule 1B1:
I misspoke in the first version of my amendment by saying “Use of this variation does not need to be announced in advance”, which would have contradicted rule 1B1. That wasn’t my intention, and I corrected it by changing “in advance” to “in advance publicity”, which is the wording used in 14H6. Chris Kim, who was the author of the ADM, didn’t think this was enough, so I added “but should (or must? - I’m not sure what word was used) be announced before the first round.”
Edit: actually Chris Kim was the author of a similar ADM on the same subject. Chris’s ADM was ruled moot after the Alex Relyea / Ken Ballou ADM was approved as amended.
The variation is the same as the current rule, meaning that there is no penalty for touching the rook first when castling. Use of this variation does not need to be announced in advance publicity. The “Big Deal” which can affect game results is the new main rule, which requires players who attempt to castle by touching the rook first to move the rook. Although as a main rule it doesn’t have to be announced at all, I think it would be a good idea for directors at tournaments which will use this rule instead of the variation to tell players about it at the start of each tournament.
Does this mean players who touch the Rook first when castling are not allowed to castle and must move the Rook instead?
[/quote]
That’s the main rule as of January 1st 2015, but there is a variation which is the same as the current rule (may castle with the rook first) which doesn’t have to be announced in advance publicity, but should be announced before the first round. In other words, it’s up to the organizer or director to decide which rule to use.
[/quote]
I’m glad the variation was approved with a announcement that probably should have been “must” be announced before the first round. Lets say I show up to your tournament in January expecting the new rule to be enforced for castling. You choose to use the old rule/new variation. As originally proposed, with no need for announcement of the variation, how would I know WHICH rule was being used until I castled? How would anyone know which rule was being used unless it was announced?
Mike
[/quote]
Precisely. This is one rule that should be all or nothing, since it can determine game results. At the least, the variation should be a Big Deal, requiring notice in all advance publicity, etc.
[/quote]
The variation is the same as the current rule, meaning that there is no penalty for touching the rook first when castling. Use of this variation does not need to be announced in advance publicity. The “Big Deal” which can affect game results is the new main rule, which requires players who attempt to castle by touching the rook first to move the rook. Although as a main rule it doesn’t have to be announced at all, I think it would be a good idea for directors at tournaments which will use this rule instead of the variation to tell players about it at the start of each tournament.
[/quote]
If the new rule on Jan 1 is to enforce King-touch in castling and penalize rook-touch (aka FIDE rules) by forcing a rook move, the variation [size=150]HAS[/size] to be announced someway in advance! How is anyone to know that the variation is being used, allowing Rook-touch, instead of the new main rule unless someone announces it in some way. It makes no sense to have a variation that does not need to be announced that is very different than the main rule?? When I come to your Jan 3-4 tournament in Mass, unless you announce it somehow - I prefer smoke signals outside the tournament hotel, how will I know? Am so glad that is has to be announced with Chris’s variation, but you’re still saying in your last statement that the new variation doesn’t have to be announced in advance? THAT would be the big deal 
Mike
Bill Goichberg addressed that quite well in the meeting. The principle is that variants need to be announced in advance publicity if a reasonable person’s decision to play would be impacted by the use of the variant. Since the standard rule will be rook touch gets penalized and the variant will be no penalty either way, it is hard to believe any rational person would decide not to come to a tournament if either piece could be touched first. Thus no advance publicity is needed. However, you’ve got to post the use of the variant on site so the rules sharks will know they need not bother waiting to pounce on an unsuspecting miscreant who touches their rook first. By posting it you are serving notice that you aren’t buying it.
I’ve created this topic as a spinoff of “Delegates meeting” in the USCF Issues forum.
I long for the good old days when if it was obvious that a rook moving next to the king followed immediately by the king moving 2 squares to the opposite side of the rook it was clear intent to castle, and there would be no forced rook move. It’s not as if the player was trying to make 2 moves in a row with the second being illegal.
Why is intent now being ignored? I don’t consider trying to be more like FIDE as a good excuse as lately FIDE seems to be making several changes which aren’t going to be popular.
Full disclosure: I move my king first.
.
Really? So the white player cannot castle if he performs the following 4-step sequence?:
- Uses his right hand to first pick up his h1 rook, then
- With the same hand also picks up his king, then
- Places his king on g1, then
- Places his rook on f1.
I am surprised that the above 4-step sequence is illegal for castling starting in 2015 - in the absence of a special announcement by the TD.
To be consistent, perhaps we next should penalize any player who first picks up a queen from off the board, and then promotes e7-e8/Q.
.
I miss the good old days when a Hershey bar cost 5 cents and weighed two ounces, too.
To quote George C. Scott as Patton: “The world grew up, hell of a shame.”
As for growing up, it seems a rather childish rule to punish a player for touching the rook first when it is clear that the only intent was to castle. How is anyone better off with such a rule? My preferred solution is to tell the player that if the rook is touched again in the same game when castling, it won’t be permitted. 
I suspect most of the players you’re likely to tell that to won’t get the joke.
Do I like the new castling rule? No, but I hate the Designated Hitter, too, and if I’m umpiring a baseball game, I don’t get to pick the rules I enforce.
I was surprised by the direction the discussion took. I certainly expected the issue to be every bit as contentious as it was. But I really thought the primary argument would be that older players who were very set in their ways would not be able to adapt. I did not expect the focus to turn to scholastic players.
I would actually have thought that for young children, castling by touching the king first would be practically second nature. After all, when interacting with a chess playing computer program using a diagram of the board, one castles by moving the king two squares (and the program then positions the rook appropriately).
Now that the USCF once again requires touching the king first while castling (its second change to synchronize castling rules with FIDE), how long will it be before FIDE allows touching the rook first and the USCF returns to that to synchronize castling for a third time with FIDE?
What about simultaneously touching both rook and king? Which rule variation in the 6th edition of the Rulebook covers this technique? (I have not received my new Rulebook, yet)
If a player picks up the king first and then picks up the rook, and switches them around in his fingers, is it wrong for him/her to put the rook down first and then place the king on their proper squares, all in one movement? This is a typical maneuver for many players. The new rule seems to preclude that. How do you monitor and enforce the correct procedure.
Must a TD be available to verify that the castling maneuver was done correctly? (Similar to the way kids ask for verification that they have checkmated the opponent in many scholastic tournaments.)
Should the player stop the clock and ask the TD to come over to see that he is castling correctly? (I can imagine wags wanting to do this just for fun.)
May a player castle with one hand and press the clock with the other hand?