Page 1 of 3

Illegal Castling into Legal Castling.

Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2018 8:27 pm
by Geoff Chandler
From Round 9 of the 2018 Olympiad.

Daniel Cabral (Bermuda) - Djibril Diallo (Diallo)

Here. White to play.



White played 14.0-0 which was recorded as being played and both players
appear to have been unaware this was illegal. After 14.0-0 the score goes bad.

Let us suppose that Black had noticed this was illegal, called across an arbiter
and claimed that that White should undo 14.0-0 and make a move with his King.

Could White have then simply played 14.0-0-0 or would he have to play 14.Kd1 or 14.Kd2.

Re: Illegal Castling into Legal Castling.

Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2018 8:52 pm
by Ian Thompson
Geoff Chandler wrote:
Mon Oct 08, 2018 8:27 pm
Could White have then simply played 14.0-0-0
Yes

Re: Illegal Castling into Legal Castling.

Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2018 8:56 pm
by Geoff Chandler
Trying to correct Djibril Diallo (Mali)

Just recreating new posts. I'm blaiming 14 0-0.

Thank you Ian.

Re: Illegal Castling into Legal Castling.

Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2018 10:16 pm
by JustinHorton
My recommendation would be to employ the edit function rather than the quote function

Re: Illegal Castling into Legal Castling.

Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2018 10:23 pm
by Michael Farthing
*Geoff Chandler I think meant to wrote:
Mon Oct 08, 2018 8:27 pm
From Round 9 of the 2018 Olympiad.

Daniel Cabral (Bermuda) - Djibril Diallo (Mali)

Here. White to play.



White played 14.0-0 which was recorded as being played and both players
appear to have been unaware this was illegal. After 14.0-0 the score goes bad.

Let us suppose that Black had noticed this was illegal, called across an arbiter
and claimed that that White should undo 14.0-0 and make a move with his King.

Could White have then simply played 14.0-0-0 or would he have to play 14.Kd1 or 14.Kd2.
*Please excuse the grammar here: the software is just not up to the intricacies of tenses
[Justin is quite correct to say editing is better than quoting, but I can only do the former as I can't edit someone else's post (quite rightly)].

Re: Illegal Castling into Legal Castling.

Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2018 10:33 pm
by Paul Cooksey
4.4 If a player having the move:
c. intending to castle, touches the king or king and rook at the same time, but castling
on that side is illegal, the player must make another legal move with his king (which
may include castling on the other side). If the king has no legal move, the player is
free to make any legal move

Which is what I would have guessed, I was expecting some sort of anomaly.

Re: Illegal Castling into Legal Castling.

Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2018 11:03 pm
by Carl Hibbard
Geoff Chandler wrote:
Mon Oct 08, 2018 8:56 pm
Trying to correct Djibril Diallo (Mali)

Just recreating new posts. I'm blaiming 14 0-0.

Thank you Ian.
Geoff edit's are now complete :D

Re: Illegal Castling into Legal Castling.

Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2018 11:14 pm
by Tim Harding
Geoff Chandler wrote:
Mon Oct 08, 2018 8:27 pm
From Round 9 of the 2018 Olympiad.

Daniel Cabral (Bermuda) - Djibril Diallo (Diallo)

Here. White to play.



White played 14.0-0 which was recorded as being played and both players
appear to have been unaware this was illegal. After 14.0-0 the score goes bad.

Let us suppose that Black had noticed this was illegal, called across an arbiter
and claimed that that White should undo 14.0-0 and make a move with his King.

Could White have then simply played 14.0-0-0 or would he have to play 14.Kd1 or 14.Kd2.
Yes Paul is right. If this had been detected (as it should have been) White's options were to castle queenside or play the K to d1 or d2.
I see the player concerned was the Bermuda reserve so he clearly had not recovered from the Bermuda party several days previously.

There is actually a comment to 7.2.1 in the laws that if a game is played on a digital board (as this was) "it can happen that the computer stops to record the moves. In such cases the operator may inform the arbiter that something went wrong and the arbiter has the duty to check what happened."

Presumably in this case, because there were so many live boards and this wasn't a very important match, the failure of the live board was not noticed by the operators or they failed to communicate with the arbiters. We did have a case in an Irish tournament in August, where a peculiar type of live board called Chess Spectator was being used, that somebody played ...Nc6-f7. The operators told us that something had gone wrong and we tried to rectify it. But the player who made this move was so confused that he resigned a move or two later.

Re: Illegal Castling into Legal Castling.

Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2018 11:25 pm
by Roger de Coverly
Tim Harding wrote:
Mon Oct 08, 2018 11:14 pm
Presumably in this case, because there were so many live boards and this wasn't a very important match, the failure of the live board was not noticed by the operators or they failed to communicate with the arbiters.
That would seem an unexplored issue, namely what the communication protocols are between the team monitoring the live transmissions and the arbiters on the floor responsible for the matches. It's not just illegal moves, there would be repetitions of position and move counts as well. In some cases the match arbiter just needs to know a claim is possible, in others the arbiter is expected to intervene to terminate the game.

Re: Illegal Castling into Legal Castling.

Posted: Tue Oct 09, 2018 11:28 am
by Alan Atkinson
Illegal move: piece touched: any legal move with that piece.
Castling is considered a King move, so...

Re: Illegal Castling into Legal Castling.

Posted: Tue Oct 09, 2018 1:36 pm
by Geoff Chandler
Hello again and thanks everyone for replying and for Carl for fir fixing the Edit function.....

I was thinking it was OK to 0-0-0 but something nagged,

''The King has moved, albeit an illegal move...therefore you cannot castle.'

Sounded too good to be true.

I was attracted to this game because it had a nice double blunder revolving around two Queen winning ideas.

Here - Black to play.



Black saw that if he could play Ba4 then that wins the White Queen.

10...Nxd4 11.Nxd4 Ba4



Mission accomplished

Here White should have played 12 Qxa4+ Qxa4 13.Bb5+
which wins back the Queen and White remains a piece up.

White instead played 12. Bb5+ saving the Queen but giving back the piece

Here is game up to the point where White castled Kingside.


Re: Illegal Castling into Legal Castling.

Posted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 6:53 pm
by Stewart Reuben
This has become very interesting. I conducted an arbiters' course in Georgia. It concluded well before the end of the Olympiad. One of the students waa Daniel Cabral BER. He scored 89%. He was awarded the FIDE Master title.
Would I have passed him, had I known about his illegal move?

I think on electronic boards, a warning light and bells should go off to warn the operator - and thus the arbiter - that something has gone wrong.

Re: Illegal Castling into Legal Castling.

Posted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 9:07 pm
by Brian Towers
Stewart Reuben wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 6:53 pm
Would I have passed him, had I known about his illegal move?
I sincerely hope so!
Next thing we know you'll be suggesting that a famous International Arbiter and member of the Rules Commission should be stripped of his titles and position for having once agreed a zero move draw which must have brought the game of chess into disrepute :-)

Re: Illegal Castling into Legal Castling.

Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2018 6:33 am
by David Sedgwick
Stewart Reuben wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 6:53 pm
I think on electronic boards, a warning light and bells should go off to warn the operator - and thus the arbiter - that something has gone wrong.
In most events the electronic boards are controlled from an area contiguous to the playing area. A bell going off is likely to disturb other games.

Re: Illegal Castling into Legal Castling.

Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2018 8:31 am
by NickFaulks
Stewart Reuben wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 6:53 pm
He was awarded the FIDE Master title.
I assume that is the FIDE Arbiter title. At what point will this be announced ( other than on this forum )?