Move "determination" vs "Determination"

Running Chess Tournaments
1

And now for something completely different.

The definition of “Determined move” has bothered me for quite some time now.

The 4th edition rulebook was the first to distinguish clearly between a Determined move (too late to take it back) and a completed move (avoids time forfeit). When the 4th edition came out in 1993, I regarded this new distinction as a great advance in the clarity of the rules.

Roughly speaking, a move is Determined when the hand leaves the piece after moving it, and completed when the clock is pressed. This distinction becomes important in several situations. Here are two:

  1. A Determined move cannot be retracted, but you must still complete the move by pressing the clock. If your flag falls between your move’s Determination and its completion, you still lose on time. (There are specific exceptions for checkmate and stalemate. In these cases, the move is completed when it is Determined, i.e. you do not have to press the clock to avoid a time forfeit.)

  2. The interval between a move’s Determination and its completion is the proper time to offer a draw.

The rulebook makes the following definitions:

Throughout the above, I have capitalized “Determined” (even though the rulebook uses lowercase) to distinguish it from the generic concept of “determined”. It’s kind of like the difference between “Democratic” and “democratic”.

You could say that a move is “determined” (lowercase, i.e. generically) when it is no longer legal to play any other move. With this definition, some examples of when a move is determined (lowercase) would be:

A. In the case of the legal transfer of a piece to a vacant square, the move is determined when the player’s hand has released the piece.

B. In the case of a legal capture, the move is determined when the player has deliberately touched both his or her own piece and the opponent’s piece.

C. In the case of legal castling, the move is determined when the player’s hand has released the king, which has moved two squares toward a rook.

D. In the case of the legal promotion of a pawn, the move is determined when the pawn has been removed from the chessboard and the player’s hand has released the new appropriate piece on the promotion square.

E. If a piece has only one legal move, the move is determined when the player has deliberately touched the piece. :slight_smile:

F. If an opponent’s piece can be legally captured in only one way, the move is determined when the player has deliberately touched the piece to be captured. :slight_smile: :slight_smile:

G. If there is only one legal move on the board, the move is determined as soon as the opponent has completed his previous move. :slight_smile: :slight_smile: :slight_smile:

Note that A through D are exact replicas of 9A through 9D above. E through G are logical extensions of the idea.

Did the rulemakers, by confusing the concepts of Determined (uppercase) and determined (lowercase), come up with a couple of unwise rules? Look especially at 9B and 9C. Supposedly, you are allowed to complete a move (press the clock) as soon as you have Determined it. Yet, in the case of a capture, is it really legal to press the clock as soon as you have touched both pieces? Or, in the case of castling, can you press the clock as soon as you have played Ke1-g1?

Suggestions:

  1. Change the definitions in 9B and 9C.

  2. Throughout, use a word other than “Determined”. Perhaps “executed” would be better, although I would prefer a word that seems to have a meaning halfway between “determined” and “completed” (I’m open to suggestions.)

Bill Smythe

2

Is it physically possible to do that without using both hands, which is illegal?

No. “[Castling] … [is] completed when that player, having transferred the rook to its new square, punches the clock.” One must transfer the rook (or the king, in the case of a player transfering the rook first) before punching the clock.

I’m still working on the significance of the upper and lowercased spelling of the word ‘determined’.

3

Perhaps we need to borrow some terminology from other games, such as “turn.”

  • Move determined (king moved 2 squares when castling)

  • Move completed (hand removed from rook after castling)

  • Turn completed (clock punched)

For example, you can offer a draw when it’s your turn and you have completed your move.

But “turn” will never catch on because it doesn’t sound very chess-like. Inning? :slight_smile:

4

Determined vs executed vs completed vs concluded vs effectuated vs consummated vs discharged vs realized vs finalized.

The upshot of this is it matters how you choose these words.

They all have slightly different meanings and acceptable usages.

To describe the completion of a move, I prefer FINALIZED, it infers precision.
To describe the appropriate interval where a draw offer is allowed, I prefer after EXECUTING the move.

To enhance clarity, maybe a move-pair needs a collective term.

SET?, the ubiquitous MOVE-PAIR, Inning -na, turn-na, trick-na

there needs to be a better collective like a PRIDE of LIONS and a GAGGLE of GEESE.

Suggest:

  1. a MEASURE of moves
  2. a PLOY of moves
  3. a STRATAGEM of moves
  4. a VARIATION of moves
5

Yes: touch your piece (don’t grab it), then touch opponent’s piece (don’t grab it either), then hit the clock, all with the same hand. Neither piece moved, both were just touched!

Is there a definition for when a capture is completed, similar to the one for when castling is completed?

Is one required to complete the move before hitting the clock?

If so, I think this is not ambiguous. If not, maybe it is. Sorry I don’t have a rulebook to check this myself.

6

[b]The move must be completed before it is Completed.

completed = all pieces moved/captured/removed from the board.
Completed = the clock is punched.

The rulebook clearly establishes what to do in the case of a promotion that is not completed, i.e., a pawn is left on the eight rank and the clock is punched. The opponent has the option of pressing the clock while the player places the promoted piece on the board. The opponent should have the same recourse with all incomplete moves, i.e, place the player back on the clock. [/b]

7

That sounds reasonable, but on a digital clock in a game with multiple time controls that will cause a problem. The clock will treat it as additional moves.

Jim

8

I could be mistaken but I think the move counters on the clock don’t count officially when differing from the score sheets as far as number of moves. I.E. the score sheet controls.

9

That’s true, but in a multiple-control event (such as 40/120, SD/60), if the clock thinks 41 moves have been played when only 39 actually have been, the clock will have added an hour to each side, prematurely. Thus, the clock will display not only an inaccurate move count, but an inaccurate time setting as well.

Bill Smythe

10

Does it say in the rulebook something similar about capturing a piece, for example something like: Capture is completed when the capturing piece is moved to the capturing square and the captured piece is removed from the board and the clock is punched? And similarly that other complex moves (if any) completions are described unambiguously?

11

Well, the discussion so far has certainly been interesting – even though not all of it has gone in the intended direction. At least I’ve started something. :slight_smile:

If you mean “determine” rather than “complete”, then one would think so, wouldn’t one? Further, the opposite should also be true – a player should be allowed to complete the move (press the clock) as soon as he has determined it.

But this gets back to an earlier question. Suppose a player has the winning move QxR available, but has only a split second left on his clock to make the last move before time control. Is he then allowed to touch the queen (but not pick it up), then touch the rook (but not pick it up), then press the clock? After all, he has determined his move, according to 9B.

In other words, am I the only person bothered by the rulebook definition of “determined”?

OK, so now we have uppercase and lowercase versions of “completed” as well as “determined”.

Your “Completed” is the rulebook’s “completed” (the rulebook never uses uppercase).

Your “completed” is my “Determined”.

My “determined” is the point at which no other move is any longer legal.

The rulebook “determined” is a confused hodge-podge of my “Determined” and my “determined”.

What’s next, “Touch Move” vs “touch move”? :slight_smile:

Bill Smythe

12

So, essentially you are arguing that we need a third category. The move is determined when no other move may legally be made. The move is executed when the player has released the piece on its destination square and has removed any captured piece from the board, at which point he is permitted to press the clock. The move is completed when the clock has been stopped. It’s a fair point, though I find it hard to imagine that anyone would claim that he could stop his clock after touching a piece that had only one legal move but before actually moving the piece.

13

I think we probably do need to make the distinctions that Bill was talking about. Let’s reductio ad absurdum:

If castling were a checkmating move, could the player stop after just moving the king two squares toward the rook and go report the result? :unamused:

What if his time ran out AFTER moving the king (determining the move) but BEFORE moving the rook. Is it still a checkmate?

14

YES.

15

It will be an absurd looking checkmate if the opposing king doesn’t even appear to be in check. That’s why I think we need to distinguish between “Determined” and “Executed” (or whatever we call it) – just to make examples like this perfectly clear.

It doesn’t seem to me that it should be checkmate until the move has been fully “executed” – even if it has been “determined”.

Likewise, in the case of a capture that results in checkmate I don’t believe it should be sufficient to simply touch the capturing piece and the piece to be captured and then announce “checkmate”. You ought to have to actually make the move.

16

Hmmm…how often has this situation been a problem?

Tim

17

I was about to ask the same question as well.

I understand that many years ago the rulebook used to define check as when the opponent’s King was under attack by one or two of the player’s pieces. Someone pointed out that if the opponent were to move a pinned piece causing the King to now be under attack three times that by definition the opponent was no longer in check.

It was simple to change the definition of check to when the King is under attack by one or more pieces. But, the rules are difficult enough as they are with the definition of “determined” and “completed”, we really don’t need to add a third term to cover the rare possibility of a move that isn’t physically completed but is determined.

18

By asking this question, both of you seem to be suggesting that the rule, as it currently stands, is so absurd that nobody would dare try to follow it anyway, so why bother to change it.

I cannot agree with such a philosophy. When a loophole is discovered – whether through a forum like this, or through somebody in real life actually trying to drive a truck through it – something ought to be done about it.

I recall an incident a couple of decades ago where a prominent tournament player (and currently active contributor to these Forums, by the way) played the white pieces in the following tournament game:

  1. e4 e5
  2. Bc4 Nf6
  3. Qxf7 mate

– and argued that, since mate ends the game, any subsequent discussion about the legality of the moves is moot. Of course, the TD overruled him, and the USCF appeals committee later did the same. But, lo and behold, the next edition of the rulebook stated that a legal checkmating move ends the game.

I recall this too. I think it was a problem with the FIDE rules, not the USCF rules. Example: Black plays …Nh5-g3, placing white’s king on h1 in double check from black’s rook on h8 and knight on g3. White, instead of parrying either check, plays Pe4-e5, placing himself in a third check from black’s bishop on c6.

And the change WAS made, wasn’t it?

The possibility is hardly rare. It comes up each time there is a capture, or when somebody castles. (Come to think of it, castling is rare, at least in my :slight_smile: games.)

Bill Smythe

19

Fear of a possible problem and having an actual problem are two different things.

The rulebook would be many times larger if we wrote rules about every possible fear that could exist.

Our TDs have to sometimes solve rare problems using the fine brains we all know they have.

Tim

20

While I agree with everything in your last post, I also feel that an obviously defective rule should be replaced, especially when there is a simple solution.

Bill Smythe