games chess

Games Chess

Grant and you will unmask!
Funky name, real passions
[ Sign up | Log in | Guest ] (beta)
usethepawn 17 ( +1 | -1 )
Interesting. Playing OTB.
Opening comes as 1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Qxd5 at this point white accidentally touches his king, forcing Ke2 giving black a mate on e4.
Quite shattering if you ask me!
marinvukusic 34 ( +1 | -1 )
... That is pretty stupid.

Accidental brush with the back of the hand happens often, is always ignored and can't be considered "touching".

If White disturbs the pieces he can just say "J'adoube" and rectify that with no penalty.

If White grabbed the King (for some incomprehensible reason), "J'adoube" still saves the day (if said immediately).
ccmcacollister 7 ( +1 | -1 )
Both players won What greater cost... to lose the game, or lose one's honor~?
marinvukusic 49 ( +1 | -1 )
? What are you talking about? White accidentally touched his King.

I say no, the game should have proceeded normally. Of course you might be happy to take a point like that but I am sure majority of people would rather play it out (at least people I am communicating with).

A lot of people like to adjust pieces before their first move (and forget to say"J'adoube"). Get ready to pounce on them? Make them play with the h pawn? I say no, be a normal person and let it be.
ccmcacollister 103 ( +1 | -1 )
! Only WT knows if he accidentally touched his King or otherwise. But in any case he felt it more important to create not even the possible appearance of impropriety, even if he knew it to be an accident. The moreso since he moved it without his opponent having to remind him or make an actual claim ...from the info available.

Of course, grabbing your King in hand without saying J'adoube Before Touching it, is simply cheating to try to say it afterward. I once touched a piece that dropped a N as my opponent walked out of the room, but dutifully moved the erring Knight. Having then to sit and watch the losing position more than a 1/2 hour till he returned. But he did return to win his piece, but lose on time.

As for his opponent, get serious ... any tournament player would take such a point. And if they did Not then they would be being dishonorable to every other player in the event since that point would change future pairings and thus the entire outcome ... if the game ended in other than the win BL has coming.
marinvukusic 131 ( +1 | -1 )
... Sure everyone would give mate after 3.Ke2?? - and why not? When the move is played and the clock pressed there is no mercy (it would be against the rules and the spirit of the game).

My point is that White probably didn't know the J'adoube rule, and therefore essentially gave up a point (which can also be interpreted as a nice "legal" way to throw the game).

Yes it is proper to say "J'adoube" before you touch the piece but in practice people sometimes reflexively adjust pieces on the board and say it when the hand is already on the piece (or don't say it at all, but this is rare among adults). This always happens immediately after that piece has been moved and I let it go every time (people are not robots).

If someone did it after some thinking (and forgot to say "J'adoube") then I would insist that the touched piece must be moved.

I personally would not react if White said J'adoube and played something normal -the case is so extreme that it is obvious White made a simple mistake when touching the King (if he seriously wanted to move it then he is so bad that I would just cream him in 15 moves and that is that).

But this is a matter of my personal ethics (that matters to me more that one easy undeserved victory). Besides I would still try to win the game normally.
wschmidt 124 ( +1 | -1 )
I'd like a little more clarification from usethepawn about what "accidentally" meant in his opening message. I completely agree with marinvukosivic that in typical tournament play accidently brushing one piece while reaching for another doesn't trigger the touch-move rule. I don't agree, however, that saying "j'doube" after purposely grabbing a piece, gets one off the hook. In my opinion, intentionality is the key.

I lost a Tuesday night tournament game recently in situation as close to the edge of this intentionality question as I've ever been. I had a winning initiative as White and Black played the only move that could give him any counterplay. I had to move one of my rooks and I thought long and hard about moving the one on the seventh rank. After a while it became obvious to me that I needed to move the other, which was on the 2nd rank. As soon as I made that decision I reached out ......and grabbed the 7th rank rook. It was as though my brain had already transmitted the instructions to my hand and forgot to send a corrected message down the neural system. So there I was with the wrong rook in my hand, knowing that I "intended" to pick up the other but had not done so. Try to explain that to my opponent? Say, "J'doube"? No, I moved it....and resigned 5 moves later.
ganstaman 44 ( +1 | -1 )
www.chessgames.com

Possibly: "pawntificator: I read that this same thing happened to a grandmaster (dang it now I forget who... maybe petrosian) because he accidentally moved his bishop to c3 instead of the knight and the rule was you had to move your king if you messed up like that. I hope that isn't the rule anymore. "
ganstaman 28 ( +1 | -1 )
story time I once meant to move my rook to e5 as that was the best place for it. I looked for a bit at moving it to e4, as that set a trap, but was otherwise useless. So I decided to go with e5.

I wrote down ...Re4 and moved my rook to e4. Honestly, e5 was where I decided to put it.

Happy ending: my opponent fell for the trap, so it was all good.
fmgaijin 84 ( +1 | -1 )
Nimzovitch, gangstaman In the 1930's, a number of tournaments experimented with a rule that illegal moves would be punished by forcing the player who attempted an illegal move to move the K (if possible) instead. In the game in question, Nimzo supposedly picked up the B on c1 instead of the N on b1 and played Bc3. He then resigned in view of the "forced" Ke2 Qe4 mate.

Another story from the same period has the young Reshevsky using the rule to his advantage. He calculated a nice combo but found that it didn't quite work due to his opponent being able to interpose Qb6+ at a key point. He figured that if he "mysteriously" played Kh1, the opponent would become suspicious and see the combo, so he instead played an illegal move, was "punished" by being compelled to move Kh1, and then collected the point when his unsuspecting opponent overlooked the combo.

True stories? I don't know--I wasn't there!!
marinvukusic 59 ( +1 | -1 )
wschmidt Now it sounds like I am advocating cheating, which is not the case if you read my messages carefully. I simply pointed out what a ridiculous case this is, and that was the only way to save the situation.

If I was Black there I would certainly let White off the hook (even if he didn't say anything).

Regarding playing the piece on the wrong square - everybody does it, hopefully learning from that mistake. The root of that is psychological - chaotic way of thinking that a lot of players employ. Kotov explained it perfectly in his book "Think like a Grandmaster" (I recommend that book to everyone!).
usethepawn 113 ( +1 | -1 )
wschmidt I dont know the details exactly. I didnt, myself, witness it but was told about it by a fellow player at my club. I understand that it wasnt an accidental brush so i imagine it must have been an adjustment where he didnt say "J'doube" ill try and get a little more information on the matter when i see him next.

As for having a plan but not having your brain process it, i recently played a tournament game and played the kings gambit against a lower rated player.
The opening was something along the lines of:
e4 e5
f4 d6
Bc4 Nf6
Nc3 Nxe4.

Taking the N obviously game him the fork with the d pawn but unless i did something about it the Q was going to make a huge check on h4 so i went over it and decided i was going to play Nxe4 which would result im assuming in d5 then drop my B to b3 now assuming dxe4 and then play Qh5 threatening the mate on f7 and protecting the h file against his queen. I however processed this all in my head and decided it was what i was going to do. But got a little ahead of myself and played Bb3 instead of taking the N first. This gave him the Qh4+ i had to block with g3 then Nxg3 Hxg3 Qxh1 resigns.

I was kicking myself
ccmcacollister 80 ( +1 | -1 )
Sometimes players can develop bad habits which can lead them into a touch piece error that gets caught and punished. For instance, Not saying J'adoube (or I adjust), but adjusting pieces on the back rank that could not be moved anyway ... or adjusting pieces while opponent is on move (which is bad etiquette as well, and might get a complaint to TD for interfering with opponents analysis; with a probable warning being issued to you the first time).
. Doing those things can get the hands accustomed to touching the pieces carelessly. If someone really has a problem with Touch Piece Rule, the best cure often IS to literally Sit On Your Hands, as they say. Also helpful is to write your move before moving it, if that is still allowed. I am not sure if so.
kansaspatzer 24 ( +1 | -1 )
I was recently playing an OTB tournament game where I was Black. After 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4, I attempted to brush a hair off of the board. In the process, I inadvertently touched my knight. I looked at my opponent, who said, "Just say adjust." I thanked him and played 2...e5, my intended move.
chessnovice 33 ( +1 | -1 )
... Moral victories don't show up on the scorecard. You gotta come to expect that people will be especially picky when it comes to OTB tournaments. In fact, the higher the level of play, the more stringent and argumentative people become about the rulebook. Kind of a sad fact, but it's better than not having the touch rule at all.
ionadowman 128 ( +1 | -1 )
Also interesting... ... is that bit Craig mentioned about writing moves down beforehand. I had also heard that this practice had been outlawed.
For why? Because someone complained when the move his opponent had written down misled him into a mistake! And some clod actually thought the complainant had a case!!
Now, writing the move down beforehand was strongly recommended by many authors as an act of discipline. Write down the move BEFORE you play it, then have a quick once-over before actually doing so. Every now and then you'll spot something you have missed.
Now, this advice I never followed, myself, but I understand players like Bronstein did this invariably.
To my mind, what someone does with his scoresheet is no business but the player's. The aforesaid complainant got caught out reading upside down what his opponent had written, It's entirely likely the opponent spotted this and decided to turn this dude's rudeness to his advantage. Good on him.
The sooner FIDE and every other governing body revokes this ban (assuming there is one) the better.
Not that I would ever change my own OTB practice of writing the move down afterwards. (Except on GK of course: I always write down the move first!).
Cheers,
Ion
marinvukusic 108 ( +1 | -1 )
Wrong The problem is that the scoresheet is an official document. A lot of time people who did first write down the move turned in messed up scoresheets.

When they change their mind they do one of the following:
1) Write the correct move over the original one (which makes a mess)
2) Decide to cross the original move and write the correct one on the next move (losing track of the number of moves) or make long arrows and write it on the margins (I have seen all this happen)
3) Forget to adjust the move all-together

It is no wonder that the majority thinks that a minimum of self-control is reasonable to expect from a chess player. Bronstein was known to spend 40 minutes for his first move (a part of his chaotic personality and approach) and frequently turned in illegible scoresheets so he was hardly a man who should be listened to regarding such matters.

Now the only case when it is proper to first write the move down is when the player wants to claim draw by threefold repetition or 50-move rule. I see zero problems with that.
ccmcacollister 196 ( +1 | -1 )
AOR ...the "sealed move" at adjournment. :)

<"Now the only case when it is proper to first write the move down is when the player wants to claim draw by threefold repetition or 50-move rule.">

{I wonder if anyone is going to ask What Adjournment is?! Just in case, I offer this brief explanation. Once upon a time, before the advent of Sudden Death time controls or allegro clocks, there was a practice called Adjournment. It would usually occur at some point following completion of at least one time control by both players. Then in order to move the tournament along, the TD would call a break in the game so the tournament would continue and that game be completed later, some time before the last round pairings. To facilitate this, the TD would designate one of the two players to be the one who must "seal" his next move. That would consist of finding his move to make, but instead of playing it, he would write it on his scoresheet, which was then placed into a sealed envelope so that None may know what move he made, until the game would resume and the TD would open the envelope to make that move on the board. The clock is stopped only after sealing, and restarted when TD completes the move.
***
During this break in the game, the players might access a set and board to figure out the Secret Move, which was of course completely obvious 9 times of 10, as usually being one of the best two moves ... or a total blunder, in which case ... Who Cares! So then a player gathers all his friends, teammates, and Chess playing Fairies that can be found to analyze all the lines from the Secret Move or two, while the GM goes to bed for a little sleep. In the morning he will find a list of variations under his pillow ....for naturally, only the Adjournment Fairies were actually allowed to analyze for him, since Real Help would be Illegal. :))
marinvukusic 55 ( +1 | -1 )
Adjournment doesn't exist anymore... ... so your argument is only historically interesting :) in any case then you could have written any way you wanted (before of after the move).

I just remembered - last year on a tournament I saw an (extremely, top-model pretty) Israeli girl writing the moves starting from the right top cornet of the scoresheet, right-to-left. Not to mention that she wrote it in (probably) her language (it was definitely not Latin), nice handwriting but total hieroglyphs.

I am not sure that is actually allowed (since that scoresheet has no use as a recording document), but no one protested (guess why).
wschmidt 156 ( +1 | -1 )
Actually, Ion, I think there were other forces at work with regard to the rules change about writing down a move before making the move. It's been argued for a long time that this constitutes taking notes and was not permitted under the FIDE (and USCF) rules. However, it's only become an issue since PDAs and, in particular, the MonRoi notation device have become practical alternatives to scoresheets. Once they're allowed in the tournament hall, if a player "notates" his move using sucha device, he's actually going to see the move on the screen. Pretty clearly, there's a problem there.
*
I read something within the last year to the effect, that the MonRoi folks, anticipating this problem, pushed for the rules change and were successful because FIDE saw the technology as something that was inevitable. (THe MonRoi technology does much more, I've read, than just note the moves - it can transmit them to a display board, keep entire tournament records, etc.) At least here in middle America, however, the rule is mostly honored in the breach.
*
I will say, that as the only person in my club who uses a PDA to keep track of my moves, they're very cool. I use a HP iPAQ and CEBoard 2.0 and no longer have to struggle with bad handwriting or miswritten moves when reviewing a game. No one has ever objected to me using it, I only note my move after I've moved - and I never object to my opponent writing down his move before making it.