Arbitration question

Discuss anything you like about chess related matters in this forum.
John McKenna
Posts: 4192
Joined: Tue May 17, 2011 2:02 pm

Re: Arbitration question

Post by John McKenna » Fri Sep 25, 2020 9:46 am

Such incidents are most likely to occur in general when players are short of time (juniors and novices are likely to make illegal moves at any time).

Not being an arbiter I cannot give an official answer.

Until a qualified arbiter comes along to solve this - your latest riddle of the rules - you might try reading the following reminder that shows such situations can happen even to the top players -

https://en.chessbase.com/(X(1)S(rg2ylar ... -the-rules

This has also been written (unoficially)-
05/05/2015 · If an arbiter had been watching and white moved his king into check and then black responded by making another illegal move , like he did , leaving the kings enprise to one another the arbiter can ( may be required to ) declare the game drawn . In blitz any illegal move can cost you the game IF your opponent catches the illegal move …
(See post #12 by "TheOldReb")

https://www.chess.com/forum/view/genera ... litz-rules
To find a for(u)m that accommodates the mess, that is the task of the artist now. (Samuel Beckett)

Stewart Reuben
Posts: 4176
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:04 pm
Location: writer

Re: Arbitration question

Post by Stewart Reuben » Fri Sep 25, 2020 11:26 am

John - Article A4,4 addresses this issue for rapidplay and blitz.
If the arbiter observes both kings are in check , he shall wait until the next move is completed. Then, if an illegal position is sill on the board, he shall declare the game drawn.
Thus White Ke1 Rd1. Black kd8 re8 White's clock is going. White plays Kd2. The game continues.

Ian Thompson
Posts: 2545
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 4:31 pm
Location: Awbridge, Hampshire

Re: Arbitration question

Post by Ian Thompson » Fri Sep 25, 2020 12:11 pm

Stewart Reuben wrote:
Fri Sep 25, 2020 11:26 am
John - Article A4,4 addresses this issue for rapidplay and blitz.
If the arbiter observes both kings are in check , he shall wait until the next move is completed. Then, if an illegal position is sill on the board, he shall declare the game drawn.
Thus White Ke1 Rd1. Black kd8 re8 White's clock is going. White plays Kd2. The game continues.
A4.4 doesn't address the question exactly, so its relevance is debatable.

A4.4 covers the situation where the arbiter walks up to the game and sees that both kings are already in check. He then has to wait until another move has been played. If the position is still illegal he has to declare the game drawn.

The question said the arbiter walked up to the game and saw White was already in check, with Black to move. Black then played a move putting Black in check as well as White. In this situation the arbiter knows that Black has just played an illegal move for which he could be penalised. That's different from A4.4 where the arbiter doesn't know for how many moves both kings have been in check.

David Sedgwick
Posts: 4009
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:56 pm
Location: Croydon

Re: Arbitration question

Post by David Sedgwick » Fri Sep 25, 2020 2:13 pm

Ian Thompson wrote:
Fri Sep 25, 2020 12:11 pm
Stewart Reuben wrote:
Fri Sep 25, 2020 11:26 am
John - Article A4,4 addresses this issue for rapidplay and blitz.
If the arbiter observes both kings are in check , he shall wait until the next move is completed. Then, if an illegal position is sill on the board, he shall declare the game drawn.
Thus White Ke1 Rd1. Black kd8 re8 White's clock is going. White plays Kd2. The game continues.
A4.4 doesn't address the question exactly, so its relevance is debatable.

A4.4 covers the situation where the arbiter walks up to the game and sees that both kings are already in check. He then has to wait until another move has been played. If the position is still illegal he has to declare the game drawn.

The question said the arbiter walked up to the game and saw White was already in check, with Black to move. Black then played a move putting Black in check as well as White. In this situation the arbiter knows that Black has just played an illegal move for which he could be penalised. That's different from A4.4 where the arbiter doesn't know for how many moves both kings have been in check.
What you say is correct, but I would reach the same decision as Stewart.

Not surprisingly, I cannot find a Law which covers this exact position precisely, so I consider that it should be determined in accordance with the Preface.

That leads me to the conclusion that applying Law A4.4 is appropriate.

soheil_hooshdaran
Posts: 2975
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm

Re: Arbitration question

Post by soheil_hooshdaran » Sat Sep 26, 2020 8:10 pm

How do you want to apply A4.4, when the article is for an illegal position?
What would happen if the arbiter intervenes, penalizing Black and retracting the illegal move?

Stewart Reuben
Posts: 4176
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:04 pm
Location: writer

Re: Arbitration question

Post by Stewart Reuben » Sat Sep 26, 2020 8:35 pm

Soheil, A.4.4 applies only when both kings are in check; or if there is a pawn on the rank furthermost from it starting position,

Thus you have asked a new question.
Imagine one where the white K is on d3 and all of white's other pieces are on their original squares. You can tell several moves have occurred, some of black's pieces have moved.
Clearly the two players have connived to secure this oddity. Either declare the game drawn, or forfeit both of them. The Laws cannot cover everything.

soheil_hooshdaran
Posts: 2975
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm

Re: Arbitration question

Post by soheil_hooshdaran » Sat Sep 26, 2020 8:53 pm

Stewart Reuben wrote:
Sat Sep 26, 2020 8:35 pm
Soheil, A.4.4 applies only when both kings are in check; or if there is a pawn on the rank furthermost from it starting position,

Thus you have asked a new question.
Imagine one where the white K is on d3 and all of white's other pieces are on their original squares. You can tell several moves have occurred, some of black's pieces have moved.
Clearly the two players have connived to secure this oddity. Either declare the game drawn, or forfeit both of them. The Laws cannot cover everything.
But here the arbiter clearly observed the illegal move, and has to intervene promptly.

Stewart Reuben
Posts: 4176
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:04 pm
Location: writer

Re: Arbitration question

Post by Stewart Reuben » Sat Sep 26, 2020 9:03 pm

Soheil, that is covered in A.4.2. Refer to 7.5.5

soheil_hooshdaran
Posts: 2975
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm

Re: Arbitration question

Post by soheil_hooshdaran » Wed Sep 30, 2020 5:53 pm

Stewart Reuben wrote:
Fri Sep 25, 2020 11:26 am
John - Article A4,4 addresses this issue for rapidplay and blitz.
If the arbiter observes both kings are in check , he shall wait until the next move is completed. Then, if an illegal position is sill on the board, he shall declare the game drawn.
Thus White Ke1 Rd1. Black kd8 re8 White's clock is going. White plays Kd2. The game continues.
What is White goes Kf2 here?

Stewart Reuben
Posts: 4176
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:04 pm
Location: writer

Re: Arbitration question

Post by Stewart Reuben » Wed Sep 30, 2020 6:16 pm

Then, if an illegal position is sill on the board, he shall declare the game drawn.

soheil_hooshdaran
Posts: 2975
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm

Re: Arbitration question

Post by soheil_hooshdaran » Thu Oct 01, 2020 3:38 am

The position after kf2 tis illegal? Only one king is in check

Stewart Reuben
Posts: 4176
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:04 pm
Location: writer

Re: Arbitration question

Post by Stewart Reuben » Thu Oct 01, 2020 4:27 pm

Hmm. If Black now moves to a legal position. I suppose they continue. My original concern was that perhaps Black had just played Re8. White was so surprised, he just sat there for a moment. If the arbiter interfered, that would deprive White of claiming his opponent had made an illegal move.

soheil_hooshdaran
Posts: 2975
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm

Re: Arbitration question

Post by soheil_hooshdaran » Sat Oct 03, 2020 10:20 am

So one King in check is illegal?

-------------------------------------------
And what can arbiters do during this time where no tournament is possible?

Stewart Reuben
Posts: 4176
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:04 pm
Location: writer

Re: Arbitration question

Post by Stewart Reuben » Sat Oct 03, 2020 2:42 pm

SOHEIL >So one King in check is illegal?<
Huh? It is normal to play a move, checking the opponent. If his clock is going, then he can get out of check in the usual way.

soheil_hooshdaran
Posts: 2975
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm

Re: Arbitration question

Post by soheil_hooshdaran » Sat Oct 03, 2020 5:01 pm

And what can arbiters do during this time where no tournament is possible?

Post Reply