English Chess Forum

This is not even hypothetical this time, as it happened before my very eyes in a rapidplay tournament yesterday.

White is scrambling to complete the final moves of a checkmate but ends up getting flagged before the mate can be finished off.
However, during making the claim of a win on time, the black player puts down his king in check and white then claims that it was an illegal move and he should be awarded the win...

I missed the debate that followed but in the end black conceded a loss.

Who was in the right?

The data is inadequate.
Final position
What do you mean by 'before the mate can be finished off. '
Was an arbiter in charge?
Was it being played according to the FIDE Laws of Chess?
You seem to be suggesting that Black was doing two completely separate things. Moving and claiming.

Stewart Reuben wrote: What do you mean by 'before the mate can be finished off. '

Here's a made up example which might be illustrative to Joey's case.

8/p7/4k2R/8/4K3/8/8/8

Let's say Black played Kd6, removed his hand from the king, pressed his clock and then noticed that White's flag had fallen. Had he played Kd7, he would have been awarded a win, unless White had made an Appendix G claim at some earlier stage. Does the illegal move and consequent award of extra time or loss of the game cancel out White's flag fall?

It was quite close to what roger is saying but black had the king in his hand ready to move but then spotted the flag had fallen, claimed the win on time and put the king back down into check

It's quite easy then isn't it ... White hasn't pressed the clock, so he hasn't completed the illegal move ... win on time claim stands.

Paul

Even a good excuse for dumping the king down in check He'd stopped thinking about what to play once he realised the game was won. Very natural reaction.
(Although somehow they seem to have got to the alternative conclusion in practice?).

Joey Stewart wrote:black had the king in his hand ready to move but then spotted the flag had fallen, claimed the win on time and put the king back down into check

Isn't the game over once it is observed that White's flag has fallen? He could start putting the set away for all it matters. I'm presuming that Black's clock was running at the time.

I thought that the flagfall claim should be final too, despite the injustice of it, but it seemed enough to warrant a lengthy discussion without knowing whose claim was strongest.

Roger de Coverly wrote:

Joey Stewart wrote:black had the king in his hand ready to move but then spotted the flag had fallen, claimed the win on time and put the king back down into check

Isn't the game over once it is observed that White's flag has fallen? He could start putting the set away for all it matters. I'm presuming that Black's clock was running at the time.

The order is crucial. If black has placed his king back before claiming then the following must apply:

The game is over when white's flag has fallen but the fall of the flag is clearly defined in the laws as the moment when this is noticed by the player (or the arbiter - but he is specifically excluded in rapid play). Thus if black has picked up his king and placed it down illegally in check he has made that illegal move before the flag fell.

Michael Farthing wrote: Thus if black has picked up his king and placed it down illegally in check he has made that illegal move before the flag fell.

I thought the suggestion was that he had noticed the fall of the flag whilst still holding the piece.

Ah yes. Then I agree that White loses.

Michael - while he might have MADE an illegal move he has not COMPLETED an illegal move (not pressed clock) - so there is no discussion of time penalties etc..

Paul