I was asked a touch-move question last week at the club concerning a game in progress. (Side note #1: the asker wanted to know regarding his opponent’s touched piece - he did not make a claim even when I invited him to do so, so any “ruling” was informative only at that point; Side note #2: The petitioner was down a piece in a non-threatening position and the touched piece was not likely to change any result.)
The question: does the touch-move rule apply if the claimant has made his move but not pressed his clock [i.e., forgotten to start his opponent’s clock several minutes previously]. I answered him that his last move was “determined” but not “completed” until he starts his opponent’s clock and that touch-move only applies to a player when it is his turn to move. So that the opponent was free to move another piece if he wanted to.
This seems to be backed up by the rulebook, but against the spirit of touch-move, but fairly penalizes the player for not starting his opponent’s clock as he should have. Was this “ruling” correct? Thanks!
Are you saying that player A had not yet completed his move when player B touched a piece, even though it was not yet his turn to move (because A had not yet pressed his clock?)
You can go either way and the rules would support you.
If you needed to penalize Player A for not press his clock, you can inform him that “touch move” only applies to the player on turn. And even though Player B touched a piece, he is not obligated to move it.
If you needed to penalize Player B, you can inform him that even though “touch move” does not apply until it is his turn, it is often considered disruptive behavior to touch the pieces during the opponent’s turn.
I say that you an go either way, NOT to encourage TDs to pick and choose which player gets the advantage of a ruling. As a TD, I strive to NOT be a factor in the proper outcome of a game. Sometimes that means enforcing tough rulings and sometimes that means not letting a ruling cheat a player out of the true result of the game. Having a clearer understanding of the situation you were dealing with, would help me figure out which of the above rulings was more proper.
If this is clarification I think the sequence was this:
Player A moves.
Player B thinks a minute or two, touches a piece and reconsiders.
Player A tells his opponent about touchmove. Player B objects that Player A has not hit his clock.
Player A asks the TD (me) who stops the clock (A does not make a claim, even when invited by the TD) about the situation if touch move would apply?
The TD informs Player A that touch move only applies when it is the active player’s turn to move, even though it appears Player B touched his piece with the intent of moving it. However, it was Player B who came up with the objection about A not having pressed his clock yet, not the TD.
The game continues peacefully with B winning. Again, moving the touched piece would not have dramatically altered the result of the game (no pieces hanging, etc., endgame, player B already up a piece).
In scholastic tournaments (especially with younger players), hitting the clock is a very “iffy” thing. Sometimes both players will play several moves with neither one hitting the clock.
I would say that touch-move still applies in these cases. A player doesn’t get a “free” violation of touch-move just because his opponent hasn’t hit the clock. What if the player had actually completed a move, would he get to take it back if his opponent hadn’t hit the clock yet? I actually had a player make such a claim in one scholastic tournament (he saw too late that the move he had made was a stalemate) and I ruled against him.
In my opinion if Player B releases the piece while Player A’s clock is running then the move is both determined and completed. Player A’s can then make a touch-move claim since he is on the move with his clock is running.
If Player B touched the piece without releasing it then returned it to the original square during which time Player A’s clock was running then I would likely not have upheld a touch move claim.
I am not of the opinion that a TD should stop the clock when a player ask a rules question.
This is a good point, but I like Grant Perks’ subtle appreciation of the difference even more:
Off topic, but I think I disagree here. If the players have not stopped the clock, I always stop the clocks first thing. Only later did I learn, for example, that this was a question and not a claim, but even then, unless there is a pattern of abuse, surely stopping the clocks is still correct!?
If you aren’t sure if it is a claim or not then you could/should ask directly if they are making a claim before stopping the clock. Since you thought it was a claim then I see nothing wrong with your action.
Certainly strictly following that practice could make life more difficult if one of the parties is in time trouble. “What?! The TD at the event didn’t stop your clock when you asked him a question and your flag fell during that time? What a jerk!” Fair or not fair, I’d certainly want to avoid commentaries like that. Even if not in time trouble, I don’t fully understand your beef in wanting to avoid the stoppage of play for a legitimate question. Ugh, we’ve been threadjacked
If player A was still intending to hit the clock, then presumably player A has a claim that player B has made an illegal move and should be penalized, before even reaching the question about whether touch move applies to B’s move. One resolution might be to just add two minutes to player A’s clock, let A hit his clock, and then let B make whatever move he wants to make. Hard to know without being there in person. That is, assuming player A made such a claim.
Of course, player A never made such a claim. And player B never made one either apparently. So the TD actions look fine, and certainly, I couldn’t argue with any of the above observations.
Based on the wording of 10B, I must agree with your ruling. “A player on the move who touches one or more pieces …” B cannot legally move a piece until he is on the move, and he’s not on the move until A completes his move by stopping his clock. If you really wanted to penalize B, I suppose you could give him a 2-minute penalty for “distracting or annoying” by picking up a piece when it wasn’t his move, but deciding whether that would be justified is a question for the TD on the spot.
What if player B picks up a piece, then realizes A hasn’t hit the clock, so he puts it back down to wait for A to hit his clock? A sees that he hasn’t hit the clock and now does so. Has player B done anything wrong?
Only in the sense of “distracting or annoying the opponent.” If you think otherwise, you’ll have to explain how this example can be distinguished from the one in which B does this while A’s clock is running but before A has made his move on the board. I don’t think you can as the rules now stand. It’s an infraction, but not a touch-move infraction
I would find it more distracting and annoying if my opponent moved and then sat there without hitting his or her clock, especially if it happened more than once.
What happens when your opponent simply forgets to press his clock after moving? Are you obligated to remind him? If not, are you obligated to delay your move until he finally presses his clock (or loses on time)?
I have had opponents who are quite forgetful about pressing their clocks. As a matter of sportsmanship, I like to remind them the first couple of times, but after that, I figure they’ll never learn except the hard way, so I stop reminding them. I simply think about my move as long as I want to, then I finally just move (and press my clock, even though it is already pressed).
Now some of you seem to be claiming that my actions in such a case are illegal. Come on, guys, how much forgetfulness am I forced to put up with?
Technically, you should tell your opponent to stop his clock before making your move, but if the opponent made any kind of claim oin the situation you describe, I would dismiss it out of hand as frivolous.
If your opponent has gone to the bathroom, or has gone to look at other games, are you then obligated to sit and wait until the opponent is back before making your move?
I use a Jerger, but when using my opponent’s clock I know that I have occasionally thought my opponent hit the clock when the clock wasn’t actually properly hit (hitting the button with a captured piece when the button is one that needs to be touched by a finger is one example of when that occurs). In such a case I’ve sometimes not noticed it until after making my move and hitting the clock myself. If I point it out at that point then a case can perhaps be made that I am annoying my opponent during my opponent’s move.
To avoid having a 3,000 page rulebook, some things need to be left to TD discretion to determine what to do.
Why would you want to penalize Player A for not pressing his clock. Is there some new rule I haven’t heard about that says you must press your clock within some specified time after determining your move?
And why would a TD feel the “need to penalize” any player - other than that they have violated some rule?
In fact, it is strictly against the rules to touch any piece when it is not your move. Nevertheless, players will do this (esp. when their opponent has failed to press their clock).
I think that if Player B touches a piece when it is (strictly speaking) still Player A’s turn to do something (even if all he can legally do is press his clock - or offer a draw…) then I would penalize Player B more-or-less as if it were a touch-move violation. I might be just a bit more strict, because if his clock isn’t running his hands don’t belong anywhere near the board and pieces in the first place. So, I would tend to explain it as “touch move” if he actually picked up a piece, but “distracting behavior” if he merely accidentally brushed a piece.
If Player B wants to make a move because he’s impatient with Player A not pressing his clock…AND THEN tries to claim that it can’t be “touch move” because it’s not his turn…then he is angle-shooting scum and should be treated as harshly as possible.
Proper behavior is either to remind Player A that his clock is running, or sitting silentlly until Player A’s time runs out, OR behaving as if Player A has pressed his clock, and then taking full reponsibility for what happens. Trying to have your cake and eat it too is angle-shooting; stamp it out with extreme prejudice.
The player who has not (yet) pressed his clock has done nothing wrong.
I agree. If player B is going to act as if it’s his move, then he should be following all the rules that would apply to him on his move – including touch-move.
This seems so obvious that I was very surprised to see the contrary view.
I might not go quite as far as Dr. Sloan (“angle-shooting scum”), but he’s pretty well described my own views on the subject.
