Let's Bring Back the Old Rules

[Julie Denning]

But it was in the first version of the BCF Laws in 1912!! Being an ECF official Julie may be unaware of (or in denial of) developments after that time .

Now, now Alex, that's a bit below the belt!

[Michael Farthing]

You should always remember that the most certain facts about the world are those received from ones primary school teachers, which they, of course, have received from their primary school teachers.. In my case, this included the decision by Mr Jackson (actually, a very splendid man) when finding in a game against one of my fellow pupils that his king was alarmingly constrained announced that said king was capturing one of his own pieces.

[Stewart Reuben]

John Bissom was the guiding light, possibly the only one, behind Guernsey joining FIDE. That happened in 1969.

But here is a good, non-trivial pusuit question. Which was the last federation to accept the FIDE Laws of Chess? It was grudgingly so and even today applies only to FIDE Rated play.

The USCF.

[Stewart Reuben]

Geoff Chandler. I have been meaning to correct your quote of me at the start of this thread. That I thought 1 e4 e5 2 Qh5 Ke2 is the worst possible legal move in cchess. Ke2 is not legal, it is Black's move. What I wrote was
I have long thought 1 e4 e5 2 Qh5 Ke7??? is the worst possible actual legal move in chess.
Some may think that accolade belongs to Fool's Mate. But that doesn's additionally lose a pawn.
It used to be possible to resign on move 1, but those spoilsports have changed that to move 2.

[Geoff Chandler]

Sorry about the slip up in notation.

I'd not vote for Fool's Mate being the worst move because obviously White is a beginner.
I'd be of the stance that moves judged as worst moves should only come from seasoned players
and that belongs in the worst move ever played thread.

I'm sure we all have skeletons in our cupboard there. I have a few and no doubt more to come.
Not thinking about a one move blunder, but combinations that only a reasonable player would see
and think of and playing. Then missing a huge hole in their analysis actually play it.

------

Although the official rules no longer carry forcing a King move as a penalty I'd not be at all
surprised to see it given in a book, instruction sheet or club rules from the 1950's or 1960's.

"Chess and how to play it" by B. Scriven reprinted in 1938. page 46. Rule 4.
Clearly states if a player makes an illegal move you can force the same player to make a King move.

See chess note 1965.

http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/extra/immortal.html

For another example of B.Scriven's work. The Immortal Game was a 'Recent County Championship Game.'

[Kevin Thurlow]

"John Bissom was the guiding light, possibly the only one, behind Guernsey joining FIDE. "

John Bisson (correcting the typo) was a true hero. But it's quite possible he used the old rules!

[Stewart Reuben]

Not when I knew him and I doubt it when the international congress started.
Of course you have those people who keep changing the Laws. They simplhy won't stop fidgetting.

[Julie Denning]

John Bissom was the guiding light, possibly the only one, behind Guernsey joining FIDE. That happened in 1969.

John Bisson (Kevin Thurlow's spelling is correct) was certainly the leading light behind the Guernsey Federation, and their annual congress, for many, many years. He was a stalwart of the Guernsey club from before my membership in the '60s, but if my tarnished memory serves me correctly this time, John wasn't the originator of the idea to set up a break away federation. As I recall from the time, it was actually an ex-pat Englishman who'd moved to the Island, was a top player in the club for many years and who first mooted the idea around the club.

[Stewart Reuben]

John told me he asked Jersey to join with Guernsey in the application but, at that time, the Jersey players were totally uninterested. So Guernsey went it alone. Then Jersey perceived the benefit and applied separately. FIDE accepted them, but recommended Guernsey and Jersey should amalgamate as one FIDE federation. So they did for some years.
Then the two islands fell out. So Jersey applied to join separately. By now federations had to be represented at the UN to join. But Jersey were allowed in because their application had been previously accepted.
Both the Isle of Man and Northern Ireland have subsequently applied, but stood no chance. I can't see thereever being a 6th British Isles federation. The IOM might hve been successful had they applied when I first suggeted it. Gibraltar would also like to join.
Thus we have the odd fact that two of the very biggest prize money opens in the world, Gibraltar and the IOM, are held under the umbrella of the ECF.
If you attend the Olympiad, you will find that, when Guernsey meets Jersey, there is a great deal of interest.

We have got splendidly away from the original thread.

[Michael Farthing]

So the Swiss aren't allowed to play chess?

[Stewart Reuben]

Michael Farthing >So the Swiss aren't allowed to play chess? >

I am totally lost here. But the Swiss were one of the 15 original federations of FIDE, which didn't even have that acronym when it started. It was FIE. Of course England was not one of the 15.

[Geoff Chandler]

I said:

"Although the official rules no longer carry forcing a King move as a penalty I'd not be at all
surprised to see it given in a book, instruction sheet or club rules from the 1950's or 1960's!

I did not expect to see it in a book printed in 1993.



page 85



same page

[Stewart Reuben]

Wel done. I love the title of the series. But you say it was PRINTED in 1993. When did the first edition of that imprint appear?

After all, we still had the promotion rule incorrect until much later than 1993. What is Albert Belasco's version of that?
He is still distinguishing between piece and man - and seemngly getting that wrong.

I just googled it. The last 'edition' was 1993. That of 1981 was the 38th. But it is called an 'edition'. It looks more like a reprint by the publishers Foulsham to me.
There seems to be no review of the work available. There's a great opportunity there.

[Geoff Chandler]

Good Morning Stewart,

I did look in the book for an earlier date because I knew it must be a reprint.
All it says is copyright to Foulsham 1993.

In the 'Instructive Games' section it states that part of the book is
taken from 'The Beginners Guide to Winning Chess' by Fred Reinfeld
adding (W.Foulsham & Co. 1991).

The latest Game I can find is the game:
Reinfeld - Grossman, National Intercollegiate Championship 1929

I've come across the author, Albert Belasco before. He was primarily
a draughts player. (I'm basing that solely on the fact there is a draughts
problem composed by him in the book and nothing else.)

Edward Winter has bumped into him as well. In a previous edition
of 'Chess and Draughts' Kieseritzky is given as the winner of the 'Immortal'.

http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/extra/immortal.html

I can understand why Kieseritzky has been given as White and the
winner of the 'Immortal' so often. That is because Kieseritzky was white!

Anderssen was Black in that game but moved first.

Chess Player, Volumes 1-2 By Bernard Horwitz, Joseph Kling



Next meeting of the chess big wigs Stewart suggest that as a new law. Black moves first.

[Stewart Reuben]

I once played Ian Watson. He opened 1 e3. After the game, he told me, had I responded 1...e5, he intended to play 2 e4.
One Evening Standard open, a player insisted it was his right, as player of the first move, to take the black pieces. I told him he couldn't do that. He went away to play, so I looked up the Laws to make certain I was correct.
A more interesting change would be one of David Bronstein's suggestions. Any piece could take en passant, not just a pawn. Thus 1 e4 a5 2 Bxa6.
It would change both opening and endgame theory.
The Rules Commission has set itself against any changes in the Laws which would change the history of the game.
That most often suggested is doing away with the stalemate rule. I have often wondered why that was agreed to. It has the considerable advantage that it reduces White's advantage of moving first. Remove it and I think White would score 60%.
Outlawing repetition would reduce the percentage of draws drastically. That applies in Shogi and Go. You are not allowed to repeat even, if when avoiding doing so, it would result in a lost position.