Had this situation in a game this weekend. Two experienced scholastic players in time trouble. Player A is down to 2 seconds (with 5 second delay), Player B is at 17 seconds. Player A has a fairly easy win, and is making progress, and is easily making his moves within the 5 second delay, but he is very nervous. It’s the last game, so I am watching. They are using Player B’s touch Chronos. Suddenly, while Player B is on the move, he points out that Player A’s clock has run out (and is still running). Player A protests, saying he had “hit his clock” (which he had - I had seen it). He claims a defective clock. The clock had worked perfectly up to that point, and it worked perfectly as we played with it for several minutes after the game. I ruled that absent any obvious defect, the clock has to be ruled conclusive, and Player B won. My opinion was that in his nervousness, while Player A had indeed hit his clock, he had not hit the touch button, or at least had not hit it in a way that caused the clock to stop. Player A did not take it well. (Nor did his father.)
If this were a push-button clock, and the button would have been down but the clock was still running, it would be clear there was a defect. But with the touch button, there is no way to tell if he did or didn’t hit it properly.
Did the player use his finger, or a piece to hit the sensor? You mentioned the clock did not malfunction later and from experience I know that when players use pieces to try and activate the touch Chronos it often does not register a move.
No, I confess I did not. It never occurred to me. My bad.
I don’t recall if there had been a capture on that move. But he was definitely not using a finger - he was using his whole hand. Like I said, he was very nervous. His movements were not very precise.
I don’t think I’m ready to throw my Chronos clocks away yet, but this incident tells me that the ideal chess clock should leave some mechanical evidence that the button has been pushed. And I would never recommend a touch clock if it’s true that you can’t stop it using the time-honored method of hitting the button with a captured piece. Is there some practical advantage to the touch Chronos, or do people just like its looks?
But I digress - the clock was being used, the situation arose. Was my ruling correct? Are Terry and I both wrong?
Here is an interesting case where the difference between pressing the clock (rule 5H) versus stopping the clock (rule 5I) might make a difference:
A blitz game, with the added rule(s) that if you make an illegal move you lose the game, and clock move not touch move. Black makes a move, thinks it could be checkmate. Black pauses the clock (Chronos) by pressing the center button, and raises his hand, asking the TD if this is checkmate. In the meantime, White notices that Black’s move is illegal!
Blitz rule 14 means that it doesn’t matter if it is touch move or clock move. The illegal move is not complete until the clock is pressed and the opponent’s side is started.
Asking if a position is checkmate is not a claim that I’d think can be made under 5I. If the move is not complete then it is asking for the director to analyze the position. If it is complete then it can be judged as to whether or not it is illegal (the game isn’t immediately over unless the mating move was legal).
In speed chess “illegal move loses” saves the tournament director from having to add time or subtract time. This draconian penalty helps with accuracy and is fitting for such a contest. Clock move simply circumvents the laws of chess. Touch move is a minimum standard any chess contest should abide by. Clock move is an abomination that harms the game. Fortunately, I find out what conditions I am playing under and choose wisely.
I don’t see where clock move is different in Blitz than in regular, if that’s what you mean. This clock move has always been, hasn’t it? An illegal move isn’t completed until the clock is pressed makes absolute sense to me, and I can’t imagine claiming a win after determination only. Now, if the player tries to make a move with a different piece after determination, then there would be a problem.
“Clock move” refers to the deplorable practice of allowing a player to execute a legal move on the board, look at the resulting position, then change his mind and execute a different legal move on the board (even moving a different piece) as long as he has not yet pressed the clock. It does not refer to the fact that an illegal move is determined only when the clock has been pressed.
I watched the exact same situation occur in the 2005 National Open between GM Walter Browne and Nick Faulks. They were using an old Saitek Competition Pro and both players were in time trouble when Browne made a move, hit the clock but didn’t press the button properly so his time kept running. His flag fell and Faulks claimed a win on time, which was upheld.
Various places around the country. For a while it was the standard for the scholastic national blitz side events. Now that it is no longer the standard it would be time for another survey to see what players prefer, except that official USCF blitz rules preclude that. During the clock move era the surveys strongly supported clock move but most were done at the blitz event that essentially pre-selected players that preferred clock move anyway.
Some think it is an abomination.
Some think that allowing a player to start moving before the opponent has hit the clock is an abomination (such as what happened at the US Women’s Closed play-off a few years back even though the play there was legal).
I can just see somebody under the current rules making the move Re1 to d3, not yet hitting the clock, the opponent moving Rc8 to c6, the player still on move correcting from the illegal d3 to the legal e6, finally hitting the clock with the opponent then either hitting the clock for the immediate response (leaving the c6 rook hanging) or the opponent playing Rc6xe6 for an illegal Rc8xe6 move.
The same thing could happen with clock move except that e3 could also be an intermediate square like d3, and that possibility was an incentive for players to not move until the opponent hit the clock.
So the current rules aren’t allowing this, correct?
Clock move, as Ken explained it, would violate touch move rule. Apparently some TDs don’t understand the rules?
The rules currently state that “[an] illegal move is completed when the player presses the clock, whereupon the opponent may claim a win”. I see no problem with this rule.
“A legal move is completed when the hand leaves the piece.” I’ve no problem with this rule; it does not allow a player to retract a move. However, the word completed should not be construed as to mean that a player cannot make a draw claim. I believe the word determined should be used.
The reason “completed” was used instead of “determined” is so that a player could start moving before the opponent hit the clock. If that difference is eliminated then there would proably need to be a different rule allowing a player to move once the opponent’s has been determined. Any draw claim in blitz would almost have to be one that does not require the use of a score-sheet, and I can’t think of any that would require waiting until after making a move.
The one that comes closest is the 50-move rule (if allowed) and that would require a TD observer. In such a case the TD does not reveal the count and simply awards the draw after 50 moves (assuming no captures or pawn moves caused the count to be restarted).
Another possibility would be an ILC claim but if organizers are allowing ILC claims in a blitz tournament then they deserve whatever happens to them, and they may as well allow it prior to moving anyway.
Insufficient material to continue can be claimed prior to moving.
OK, I’m just slow, that’s all. I wasn’t fully understanding the definition or significance of the term “clock-move” rule. I now understand, I think ( I hope!! ) that clock-move supersedes the touch move rule.
I apologize for hijacking this thread, and hope Joe (OP) got enough information for his question.
) that clock-move supersedes the touch move rule.