FIDE Laws of Chess

Discuss anything you like about chess related matters in this forum.
Roger de Coverly
Posts: 16009
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

FIDE Laws of Chess

Postby Roger de Coverly » Wed Oct 11, 2017 12:59 am

According to
http://www.fide.com/component/content/a ... day-2.html

One of the items that should be brought to public attention are the "Amendments to the Laws of Chess 2017", which, after the approval from the FIDE Executive Board, should become valid from 1st January 2018. According to the draft, the same regulation regarding an illegal move will apply in standard, rapid and blitz games.


But what would that be?

Illegal move loses really doesn't work for players of a lower ability standard.

Richard Bates
Posts: 2536
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2008 8:27 pm

Re: FIDE Laws of Chess

Postby Richard Bates » Wed Oct 11, 2017 3:41 am

It doesn't "work" for players of any standard. The idea that a game should be decided due to a momentary incident of chess blindness* (let alone a silly technical infringement of the "approved" method of eg. Castling or promoting a pawn, the different examples of which in the laws will no doubt grow over time), and regardless of the time situation of the affected players, is ludicrous beyond belief. Even more outrageous now that it is apparent that the ultimate penalty only applies if there aren't arbiters around to see it happen!

*let alone where it may be related to a case of actual blindness in a disabled player

NickFaulks
Posts: 3371
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm

Re: FIDE Laws of Chess

Postby NickFaulks » Wed Oct 11, 2017 7:48 am

Richard Bates wrote:The idea that a game should be decided due to a momentary incident of chess blindness*

You mean like a fair proportion of games are.

I'm not commenting on this particular rule, since I believe the whole concept of basing the Laws on legal and illegal moves is misguided. However, nobody has ever explained to me why if a momentary incident of chess blindness causes you to leave your queen en prise, your opponent takes it and you resign forthwith, whereas if your king is involved the penalty is random and sometimes negligible.

Richard Bates
Posts: 2536
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2008 8:27 pm

Re: FIDE Laws of Chess

Postby Richard Bates » Wed Oct 11, 2017 8:07 am

NickFaulks wrote:
Richard Bates wrote:The idea that a game should be decided due to a momentary incident of chess blindness*

You mean like a fair proportion of games are.

I'm not commenting on this particular rule, since I believe the whole concept of basing the Laws on legal and illegal moves is misguided. However, nobody has ever explained to me why if a momentary incident of chess blindness causes you to leave your queen en prise, your opponent takes it and you resign forthwith, whereas if your king is involved the penalty is random and sometimes negligible.


Hmm, I suppose it's a fair point, and I thinking about it further maybe I agree (it seems my opposition was motivated by not getting much enjoyment from winning a game this way, and therefore not wanting to encourage developments in the laws to increase the chances of that happening).

Perhaps therefore i should have focussed more specifically on the (growing) list of technical definitions of "illegal moves" which really are ridiculous ways to decide games. Not promoting quite correctly in the approved way, double handed castling/capturing, even mistakenly pressing the clock when its not your move etc etc. The fact that it is possible to abuse a "lenient" regime is not a reason to adopt a draconian one (unless there is real evidence that abuse is widespread).

Matthew Turner
Posts: 2640
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 11:54 am

Re: FIDE Laws of Chess

Postby Matthew Turner » Wed Oct 11, 2017 8:23 am

Whilst not being an insider on the machinations of FIDE it seems pretty clear to me what is going on here. Kirsan wanted to fundamentally change chess, so that the aim was to capture/take off the opponent's king. You may agree with that or you may not, but it is perfectly logical and it would certainly make teaching chess to youngsters easier. Kirsan was prevented from making that change, so now he and his supporters (on this issue) are trying to achieve the same through the back door. If one illegal move loses then effectively if you can take your opponent's king you win. Again you may agree with that or not, but it is perfectly sensible. For me the problems come from all the random and bizarre ways that a move might be illegal, promoting to an upside down rook, castling with two hands etc etc.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 16009
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: FIDE Laws of Chess

Postby Roger de Coverly » Wed Oct 11, 2017 9:47 am

Matthew Turner wrote: If one illegal move loses then effectively if you can take your opponent's king you win.


Against that, arbiters contrived to make the demonstration that a move was illegal by king capture was itself illegal.

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 7953
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: FIDE Laws of Chess

Postby Alex Holowczak » Wed Oct 11, 2017 10:40 am

The proposal is that from 1st January 2018, two illegal moves lose in all three speed formats of chess, not one.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 16009
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: FIDE Laws of Chess

Postby Roger de Coverly » Wed Oct 11, 2017 10:57 am

Alex Holowczak wrote:The proposal is that from 1st January 2018, two illegal moves lose in all three speed formats of chess, not one.


That seems fairly sensible. The way the announcement was first worded suggested that it might be that the first illegal move would lose in all forms of chess.

In normal play the scoresheet could be marked that an illegal move had been attempted. How would the previous illegal move be recorded in quickplay finishes, rapidplay or blitz? Whilst the precise nature of that one and half point Aberystwyth disputed game has never been made public, didn't it all start with a dispute as to whether an illegal move had been played?

Mike Gunn
Posts: 590
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 4:45 pm

Re: FIDE Laws of Chess

Postby Mike Gunn » Wed Oct 11, 2017 11:07 am

Alex Holowczak wrote:The proposal is that from 1st January 2018, two illegal moves lose in all three speed formats of chess, not one.

That would seem to be sensible, but it doesn't appear to be what is suggested in the document I have just downloaded from the FIDE website: "Appendix 2, FIDE Laws of Chess, Amendments proposed by RC". The last paragraph seems to suggest that you still lose after the 1st illegal move in a rapidplay game (If an arbiter is present and intervenes or the opponent claims a win).

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 16009
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: FIDE Laws of Chess

Postby Roger de Coverly » Wed Oct 11, 2017 11:27 am

Mike Gunn wrote:That would seem to be sensible, but it doesn't appear to be what is suggested in the document I have just downloaded from the FIDE website



In Appendix 3
A.4.2.1 If the arbiter observes an action taken under Article 7.5.1, 7.5.2, 7.5.3 or 7.5.4, he shall act according to Article 7.5.5, provided the opponent has not made his next move. If the arbiter does not intervene, the opponent is entitled to claim a win, provided the opponent has not made his next move
.

So what happens if no arbiter is present? That seems to imply a player can claim.

7.5.1 to 7.5.4 extend the definitions of illegal moves to the downright silly.

7.5.1 An illegal move is completed once the player has pressed his clock. If during a game it is
found that an illegal move 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. Articles 4.3 and 4.7 apply to the move replacing the illegal move. The game shall then continue from this reinstated position.
7.5.2 If the player has moved a pawn to the furthest distant rank, pressed the clock, but not replaced the pawn with a new piece, the move is illegal. The pawn shall be replaced by a queen of the same colour as the pawn.
7.5.3 If the player presses the clock without making a move, it shall be considered and
penalized as if an illegal move.
7.5.4 If a player uses two hands to make a single move (for example in case of castling,
capturing or promotion) and pressed the clock, it shall be considered and penalized
as if an illegal move.


7.5.5 says what happens next

7.5.5 After the action taken under Article 7.5.1, 7.5.2,7.5.3 or 7.5.4 for the first completed illegal move by a player, the arbiter shall give two minutes extra time to his opponent; for the second completed illegal move by the same player the arbiter shall declare the game lost by this player. However, the game is drawn if the position is such that the opponent cannot checkmate the player’s king by any possible series of legal moves.


So read the small print !

On the face of it, it's entirely arbitrary as to whether an illegal move loses as it depends on both the presence and intervention of an arbiter.

If you want to outlaw two handed castling and not placing a Queen after promotion and penalise pressing the clock without moving, wouldn't a simple two minute penalty suffice?

Mike Gunn
Posts: 590
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 4:45 pm

Re: FIDE Laws of Chess

Postby Mike Gunn » Wed Oct 11, 2017 12:07 pm

Generally I agree with the above comments. It's all becoming much too draconian for the majority of players. For standard and rapid I would go back to 3 (properly) illegal moves losing. By properly illegal I mean creating an illegal position. The rest would get just the two minutes penalty and not count in the total of illegal moves.

I think blitz is a special case because just a 2 minute penalty would allow a losing player to muddy the waters by deliberately making an illegal move (i) to unsettle/ distract his opponent (ii) to gain extra thinking time while the clock is being reset or (iii) gain an unfair advantage if his opponent doesn't notice the illegality. So an illegal move should still lose in blitz.

NickFaulks
Posts: 3371
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm

Re: FIDE Laws of Chess

Postby NickFaulks » Wed Oct 11, 2017 12:47 pm

Matthew Turner wrote:Whilst not being an insider on the machinations of FIDE it seems pretty clear to me what is going on here. Kirsan wanted to fundamentally change chess, so that the aim was to capture/take off the opponent's king.

Actually it would not be a fundamental change at all, just a technical change. However, in my ten years working in FIDE it has never occurred to me, nor have I heard it suggested, that Kirsan has this view, or indeed any view, on the subject. How do such theories get started?

You may agree with that or you may not, but it is perfectly logical and it would certainly make teaching chess to youngsters easier. Kirsan was prevented from making that change, so now he and his supporters (on this issue) are trying to achieve the same through the back door. If one illegal move loses then effectively if you can take your opponent's king you win. Again you may agree with that or not, but it is perfectly sensible. For me the problems come from all the random and bizarre ways that a move might be illegal, promoting to an upside down rook, castling with two hands etc etc.

Yes, yes, yes and yes.

The last time I made these points on the forum the discussion was successfully derailed by ludicrous claims that I was really motivated by a secret agenda of getting rid of stalemate.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 16009
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: FIDE Laws of Chess

Postby Roger de Coverly » Wed Oct 11, 2017 1:47 pm

NickFaulks wrote: getting rid of stalemate.


If capturing a king becomes a legal move, what happens when a player not in check has no moves with any pieces and the only possible king moves move into check?

NickFaulks
Posts: 3371
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm

Re: FIDE Laws of Chess

Postby NickFaulks » Wed Oct 11, 2017 3:30 pm

Roger de Coverly wrote:If capturing a king becomes a legal move, what happens when a player not in check has no moves with any pieces and the only possible king moves move into check?

You make an appropriate adjustment to the rules defining this as a draw.

Geoff Chandler
Posts: 1736
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 1:36 pm
Location: Under Cover
Contact:

Re: FIDE Laws of Chess

Postby Geoff Chandler » Wed Oct 11, 2017 4:58 pm

I've read so far and am still not sure.

Is it one illegal move (no matter what it is) losses
in all formats of chess. Classical, Rapid, Blitz.......friendlies?

Or is it two or three.

If it one illegal move and you lose then I think lower leagues will and
should ignore this and for an actual illegal move (Bf1-e3 type of thing)
and just make it touch move. Else fighting will break out.


Return to “General Chat”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Yahoo [Bot] and 6 guests