In a 5 minutes blitz game, I find the rule 7d, 10 and 14 confusing. This is the scenario:
Player A made a Rook move leaving his King on check. Realizing this, he retracted his rook back and move the King instead since he cannot use his rook to block the check. Can player B claim a win? Or Player A contest this by indicating rule 14, stating that since he has not pressed the clock, he can still retract the Rook move and make another legal move?
How do you decide in this matter?
As player A has not pressed the clock, player A has not completed an illegal move (blitz rule 14). As player A has not completed an illegal move, blitz rule 7d does not apply, and player B can not claim a win. Also by blitz rule 14, as player A can not resolve the check by moving the touched rook, player A is free to make any legal move.
I’m not sure why you cite rule 10, unless you mean that player A touching the rook and then resolving the check by moving another piece and pressing the clock would result in a violation of blitz rule 10. While blitz rule 10 does not explicitly state that the first piece touched must be able to move legally, I would interpret blitz rule 10 with that assumption. Otherwise, blitz rule 14 governs.
15.) A legal move is completed when the hand leaves the piece.
he picked up the rook and put it down, completed his move
with the king in check its a loss as in 7d
also i would point out the other commenter mentioned he assumes about rule 10
if this were rapid or standard, its just a time bonus/penalty,
in blitz its a loss how i read it without assuming anything
if rule 15 is legit, then you can substitute the word illegal for the word legal and that also be true
with the king in check, its a loss by 7d
rule 10 without assumptions, basicly says touch move-i should add the rook was picked up and moved and let go in this case, which by 15 is a completed move
the opponent can upon a proper move being played, can claim rule 10 enforcing the illegal move and causing 7d
if this were standard or rapid, there would be a time bonus/penalty done
and of course
TD TIP: Illegal moves for any reason lose instantly if claimed correctly. The one minute penalty does not apply to illegal moves. The standard penalty of one minute applies to other Blitz rules infractions.
however you want to interpret things, the one player made some sort of illegal move, thus it is a loss
I don’t understand Mr. Connelly’s citation above. How is this relevant to what happened? I could cite a rule about when a draw offer is valid, and it wouldn’t say anything about illegal moves, either.
Alex Relyea
i think you may be missing something, if the first piece touched must be able to move legally, then it is impossible to make an illegal move, because by your definition, the piece touched doesnt count as a touch if it cannot make an illegal move-by that people can randomly pick up pieces and put them down with no punishment since the peces cannot make illegal move-sounds silly but thats the point of it.
rule 14 could be true, if not for blitz rule 7d about the king being in check.
rule 10 is cited because the rook was moved, not just touched, but moved.
Relyrea, if thats the definition of a completed legal move in blitz,
to pick up a piece, move it, and let go of it
then the same would be true about an illegal move
an illegal move in blitz, with the king in check, is a lost game
keep in mind, its not about hitting the clock
its about pick up piece, move it, let go of it
Yes, that is completely true. I am surprised that a former tournament director doesn’t know this. Of course if a player did this repeatedly, the TD would probably penalize him for annoying his opponent. Do you really want to give an opponent two extra minutes for an illegal move at the beginning of the game because the player picks up a bishop?
Alex Relyea
Please see rule 14. It is very simple. What am I missing?
Alex Relyea
I bolded one word above. Note that a LEGAL move is completed by releasing the piece. An ILLEGAL move (per rule 14) is completed by hitting the clock. Note that it explicitly allows move a piece different from the one that is first touched if that is necessary to make a legal move.
In your example even releasing the rook on an illegal square did NOT complete the move. Rule 15 follows rule 14 which explicitly discusses legal moves, so there is no sensible reason to think that you can substitute illegal for legal in rule 15. Per rule 14 the player quite properly returned the rook to the initial square and made a legal move.
14.) A player who has played an illegal move must retract it and make a legal move with the piece touched prior to pressing the clock. If no legal move exists with that piece then he may make any legal move. Illegal moves unnoticed by both players cannot be corrected afterwards. An illegal move is completed when the player presses the clock, whereupon the opponent may claim a win.
well picking up the bishop in the beginning of a game
only if he tried to make it an actual move as it is blocked in by pawns 
otherwise its just adjusting
but once again, remember this is a blitz game
and the king is in check here
7d.) Who after an illegal move is completed by the opponent, then takes the king (if the king is in check) or claims the win and stops the clock, before the player determines a move and provided the player has sufficient mating material as defined in rule 7c.
Yep, the king is in check.
Now look to see what is needed to make that claim.
First the claiming player must not have determined a different move (let’s grant that).
Second the player leaving the king in check must have COMPLETED a move that leaves that king in check. Since an illegal move is completed only by hitting the clock, and the clock was not yet hit in this case, rule 7d is completely irrelevent to your argument.
Yeah…and in the OP situation the rook move was illegal, so Player A can make a different move as long as (s)he didn’t hit the clock (blitz rule 14 governs). I have to assume the bishop comment is some kind of joke b/c it makes no sense in the context of the thread.
rule 10 is in effect here
the other player can make the claim after a legal move is substituted for the illegal attempt
the rook was moved to another square, no question on that here, the king was still in check, the rook could not prevent the check
so if he corrects it then hits his clock, the other player can claim rule 10
thus by default enacting rule 7d
in any case, its open to intrpretation on these things, even the first poster “assumed” on part of it all
fact is if the move is corrected in this situation, then rule 10 is in effect, and the king was in check, the rook cant prevent the check, therefore it is a loss by 7d
14 only would apply if the king is not in check
In fact, the blitz rules are kind of horrible in writing about all this, as we all know an illegal move with your king in check means a loss in blitz as with 7d. Of course in rapid or standard its just a warning or such here with the check, but blitz is diffrent, and the rules do not show any exceptions on the check issue as rule 10 is written
so by that i am correct in this case.
of course if uscf changes rule 10 to handle this situation by all means do so, but without a mention of check in rule 10, i believe it defaults to 7d even if the move is corrected and clock hit.
also after the rook move, couldnt the opponent of made a determined move by taking the opponents king?
if blitz is going to be rated its a good thing the check question has come up this early, clearly rule 10 needs to be adjusted for whatever side it goes
Kevin,
I just read chess online forums and I think it is very clear.
First, the rook move is illegal since it cannot dodge the check, capture the checking piece or block the check. Therefore it is illegal. However, the player who made such a ROOK move cannot be FORCED to play that move or any ROOK move since it is ILLEGAL. He can retract it and make another move in order to make it legal. In this case, he has to move the King without penalty, since moving other pieces will leave the King in check.
This is of course only valid, if he has not pressed the clock. Pressing the clock here is relevant
Even if RULE 10 is applied, which I really doubt so in this instance, it does not mention automatic forfeiture.
RUle 10 is valid only if there is a legal move with that piece. If there is none, RULE 10 cannot be used in this instance. RUle 14 will govern.
How in the world could you ever come up with this?
Rule 14 applies for all illegal moves. A king left in check is the most common illegal move.
Rule 7d only applies to COMPLETED illegal moves, which is not something that happened here.
Rule 14 explicitly allows moving a different piece if the originally touched piece could not make a legal move.
And your belief is mistaken. Read Blitz 14 in its entirety. An illegal move does not stand until the clock is pressed. So in the OP situation, the rook may be put back and legal move made as long as the clock was not pressed.
That is one reason there are special arbiters that can be called.
Was this game Blitz (or at least Quick Chess) rated? I can’t seem to find it or the tournament it was played in.
I believe that online and chess software should be able to let you capture the king in 5 minute or less games.
Also blitz tournaments can lead to some epic matches and such. What if player A decides to put his king next to player B’s king, and player B decides not to take player A’s king?
What if player A takes player B’s king and player B calls time on player A, then will the game be a draw?