I know I could probably download the official rules somewhere, but I
didn't.

I saw a book at the bookstore covering the rules for many games,
including chess. They had the standard touch-move rule, but then they
had one I'd never seen before. They said that if player A touched a
pieced (intentionally, I presume) during player B's turn, then after
player B's turn player A was obligated to move the touched piece if
possible (I think they said the same sort of thing if, say, player A
played Nxe5 when it wasn't his turn: that he'd be obligated to make that
capture if possible).

This would obviously be a huge, huge penalty, since it is likely, in
practical terms, to equate to two moves in a row (depending on the piece
that player A touched and the state of the board). I'm assuming that
this is not a real rule, but would like to hear if anyone else had heard
of such a rule.

(Obviously this shouldn't happen much, if ever, in tournament chess,
since most people at that level can recall whose turn it is!)

--Harold Buck


"Hubris always wins in the end. The Greeks taught us that."

-Homer J. Simpson

Harold Buck wrote:
I know I could probably download the official rules somewhere, but I
didn't.

I saw a book at the bookstore covering the rules for many games,
including chess. They had the standard touch-move rule, but then they
had one I'd never seen before. They said that if player A touched a
pieced (intentionally, I presume) during player B's turn, then after
player B's turn player A was obligated to move the touched piece if
possible (I think they said the same sort of thing if, say, player A
played Nxe5 when it wasn't his turn: that he'd be obligated to make that
capture if possible).

This would obviously be a huge, huge penalty,

Indeed it would. If A had touched, say, a knight, then B moved a pawn
that attacked A's queen, this rule would require A to move the knight
and lose his queen.

since it is likely, in
practical terms, to equate to two moves in a row (depending on the piece
that player A touched and the state of the board). I'm assuming that
this is not a real rule, but would like to hear if anyone else had heard
of such a rule.

(Obviously this shouldn't happen much, if ever, in tournament chess,
since most people at that level can recall whose turn it is!)

--Harold Buck


"Hubris always wins in the end. The Greeks taught us that."

-Homer J. Simpson

In article .com,
"Taylor Kingston" wrote:

I know I could probably download the official rules somewhere, but I
didn't.

I saw a book at the bookstore covering the rules for many games,
including chess. They had the standard touch-move rule, but then they
had one I'd never seen before. They said that if player A touched a
pieced (intentionally, I presume) during player B's turn, then after
player B's turn player A was obligated to move the touched piece if
possible (I think they said the same sort of thing if, say, player A
played Nxe5 when it wasn't his turn: that he'd be obligated to make that
capture if possible).

This would obviously be a huge, huge penalty,

Indeed it would. If A had touched, say, a knight, then B moved a pawn
that attacked A's queen, this rule would require A to move the knight
and lose his queen.


A might be able to bail himself out if the knight had a strong move,
like a check or a significant capture, but in most cases he'd just lose
his queen.

--Harold Buck


"Hubris always wins in the end. The Greeks taught us that."

-Homer J. Simpson

Harold Buck wrote:

They said that if player A touched a piece (intentionally,
I presume) during player B's turn, then after
player B's turn player A was obligated to move the touched piece if
possible.

When it is not A's turn to make a move,
it is illegal for A to touch any piece on
the board (or even the chess board).

Indeed, one of the rules forbids
to distract your opponent.

Wlod

In article .com,
"Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (Wlod)" wrote:

Harold Buck wrote:

They said that if player A touched a piece (intentionally,
I presume) during player B's turn, then after
player B's turn player A was obligated to move the touched piece if
possible.

When it is not A's turn to make a move,
it is illegal for A to touch any piece on
the board (or even the chess board).

Indeed, one of the rules forbids
to distract your opponent.


None of that is being argued. The question was: has anyone ever heard of
the rule requiring the touched piece to be moved in this situation?

--Harold Buck


"Hubris always wins in the end. The Greeks taught us that."

-Homer J. Simpson

Harold Buck wrote:
In article .com,
"Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (Wlod)" wrote:

Harold Buck wrote:

They said that if player A touched a piece (intentionally,
I presume) during player B's turn, then after
player B's turn player A was obligated to move the touched piece if
possible.

When it is not A's turn to make a move,
it is illegal for A to touch any piece on
the board (or even the chess board).

Indeed, one of the rules forbids
to distract your opponent.


None of that is being argued. The question was: has anyone ever heard of
the rule requiring the touched piece to be moved in this situation?

--Harold Buck

As CeeBee has already su8ggested, I think
that the rules mention touching a piece only
by the player on the move. Otherwise one should
apply other rules. Thus it looks like either you
complain to the torunament director or a referee
about your opponent touching the pieces, hence
distracting you, when it's your move, or you
disregard it and nothing special happens. It follows
that your opponent CANNOT be forced to move
a piece only because he was touching it when it
was not her/his move but yours. The most that
can happen would be a reprimend by the referee.
In a repeated case the referee may watch the
game and even disqualify the stubborn piece
fondler.

I just spoke my mind :-) Let others support
their view with the chess code at hand.

Regards,

Wlod

In article .com,
"Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (Wlod)" wrote:

As CeeBee has already su8ggested, I think
that the rules mention touching a piece only
by the player on the move. Otherwise one should
apply other rules. Thus it looks like either you
complain to the torunament director or a referee
about your opponent touching the pieces, hence
distracting you, when it's your move, or you
disregard it and nothing special happens. It follows
that your opponent CANNOT be forced to move
a piece only because he was touching it when it
was not her/his move but yours. The most that
can happen would be a reprimend by the referee.
In a repeated case the referee may watch the
game and even disqualify the stubborn piece
fondler.


I didn't think it was a tournament rule, but I was wondering if this
rule had *any* historical basis, or if it's just something that the
authors of this book made up. But I'm guessing from the general silence
on the topic that no one has heard of such a rule, ever.

--Harold Buck


"Hubris always wins in the end. The Greeks taught us that."

-Homer J. Simpson

Probably, the basis for it is premoving in the internet chess. Or, probably, internet premove is just a consequence of this rule which really exists? Hm....