Touch-move rule

Enclosed is a link that describes a fundamental rule that is not always   being observed at the Chess club in Lowell. It is important to highlight because this takes away an important factor in things that are competitive in nature: mistakes. Should there not be consequences for mistakes? Or should do overs be encouraged? If an individual wins a hard fought game and says that they have been playing the game a long time; has played in tournaments, then it obvious that he/she knows about this standard. My point is, intermediate players know of this rule. And if you are in a chess club: you should not only know this rule but observe it to no end. Mistakes impact the game as well as good play . That is to say, sometimes touch move is a deciding factor in the game of chess.

If you play an individual that takes nearly 2-3 minutes per move, they should have some idea of where their piece is to go. Furthermore, en passant is always observed correct? Pawn promotion is always observed; discovered check/perpetual check are always observed. Does white always move first? Is the light colored square always in the right hand corner in a chess game? If the anwer to these inquries is affirmative, I would like people to observe this rule. Negating the touch move rule is an arbitrary decision that is giving the advantage to the transgressor. Lastly, observing this rule would only serve to better the individuals at play. Would you not think twice if you knew there were a penalty for knowingly and with intention, hanging your queen? 

Touch move- If you touch a piece, you must move it. If the piece has no legal moves, there is no penalty for touching it. If you touch an opponent's piece, you must capture it if possible.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPM8py0xHi8

In tournament play, the touch move rule was introduced for a couple reasons. The first was to ensure players could not treat a live board as an analysis board, simply moving pieces about and analyzing from that new position, benefiting from physical board vision early into lines that should be calculated in the players head. The second was to stop players from pretending to make a move to guage the opponents reaction, and then bailing out if they seem to think a blunder has been made.

This is an important rule, in competitive play. However, the large majority of chess players enjoy the game casually. I would imagine that within the Lowell Chess Club, the demographic of players still leans towards the casual side. The players who are violating the touch move rule are likely newer or more laid back players. They are not ignoring the touch move rule because they're trying to gain an edge, it just isn't critical to their enjoyment of the game.

Further, touch move rule isn't enforced by a third party but rather claimed by the offended player. As you said, those who have been playing in tournaments or for some time are very familiar with the rule. The stronger players know of it, the weaker players do not. If one of the stronger players at our chess club is playing a weaker player, I would consider claiming the touch move rule to give an unfair competitive advantage to the stronger player, as the weaker player has not developed complete mental calculation skills and may need the assistance of the physical board more. To claim the touch move rule and deny the weaker player this option is to take from them a significant chunk of their playing strength, and to do so from an even or worse position when they've been outplaying you is to destroy the potential for a brilliant and foundational game they can look back on and draw inspiration from.

All of that said, I think the simplest solution is for both players to agree on the touch move rule just as they do with the time control. The rule may be offered by one player but does not need to be accepted by the other. If two strong players are playing, they will likely agree on this. If two weaker or casual players are playing, it likely won't come up at all - they may not even be using a clock! Like any sport, chess is a game that can be enjoyed on many levels, and the restrictions on play should be weighed against the playing environment and attitudes of the players. Ultimately I consider the Lowell Chess Club to be a casual environment, as the goal of the club is to introduce as many people in Lowell to the game as possible, extending to them a space to explore the board in their own way and at their own pace.

"The players who are violating the touch move rule are likely newer or more laid-back players." I am sure this is an accurate assessment under those circumstances. However, this was a reference to those stronger players that have repeatedly and with conscious intent, violated this fundamental rule. I am not referring to any other players, or third parties. My apologies for not making this clear. Also, if this is about instruction, why not teach correct play? This rule isn't only applicable in tournament play, it's a rule that exists within the game on any level. I respectfully disagree about the exceptions being made for a player of any skillset. More to the point, I am only speaking with respect to the stronger players. For example, this has mostly happened to me in end games played with stronger players. In one instance, a knight that protected a rook would which would have been en prise, on the seventh/second rank. Another instance, (the first game I played in the Lowell Chess Club end game), this rule was transgressed by a strong player, to my detriment. 

I also agree that this is a casual environment and also very much enjoy your insight. But if this rule is allowed to be transgressed, what other rules will there be exceptions for? And who gets to decide, what rule(s) will/won't be observed? In a casual game of scrabble, players are not allowed to lose a challenge **and** also allowed to keep their turn - because the challenge was their turn! They instead lose a turn. In a casual game of Uno, if you play a draw four, and you have the color of the last card played in your hand, you cannot play the card (draw four) lest you be penalized. So, if you can't move into check, castle out of check, castle after you have been checked ... - yet, others rules are observed, e.g., perpetual check and pawn promotion, there is a conscious decision to violate a specific rule. 

Why is this (touch-move rule) the exception? and why aren't there any other exceptions being observed? 

The rules that you have listed (putting yourself in check, staying in check, threefold repitition) are integral functions of the game that would break the game if ignored. Touch move rule exists to enforce courtesy in a professional environment of competitive players who have a stake in winning the game. The Lowell Chess Club is a friendly local community, playing games with nothing at stake. If players at the club are violating the rule, strong or weak, I doubt it is with malicious intent.

When you say that the rule is violated to your detriment, I don't quite understand what you mean by this. Assuming both players have not agreed on touch rules before the start of the game, if your opponent was about to make a mistake and touched their rook, and then realized this and moved their knight instead, this is not a mistake that should be taken advantage of in a casual setting. You should not force your opponent to hang their piece. In my opinion, to lose a game through no fault is bitter, and to win a game through no merit is empty.

I do not believe that the touch rule exists within the game at any level. How the game is played is decided by how the majority of people play it. I run a university chess club, and when we have our annual engagement fair I play games against probably 100 people from all chess backgrounds. There was only one person who even mentioned touch rule, at least 90 of the others much preferred to play by holding the piece they wanted to move and hovering over squares. It helps their board vision, and lets them see what squares they're allowed to move to.

As for exceptions to others rules, they are being observed quite often. It depends on the players. If two players wish to compete without en passant, or a clock, (which most novices do), or without castling, it's up to them. There are no restrictions on what two members playing each other can do with their board and pieces, and there never should be. You're free to avoid those players who you do not enjoy playing. If you're looking for a serious competitive game with all the tournament rules enforced, you can find someone who's interested in playing the same way.

The club is not about intruction. It's about seeing or making friends through common interests. This is a club, not a school. Even if it was, there are other concepts that a weaker player must learn before they can understand why the touch move rule is important. It's far more exciting to learn about what you can do in chess (tactics, positional play, puzzles, checkmate patterns, openings, traps, etc) than what you cannot (touch-move rule, castling etiquette, clock etiquette, when to resign & wasting your opponents time, etc).

I think the main reason some people don't observe touch-move is simply that the Lowell Chess Club (the OTB club, I mean) is focused on casual ad hoc play, which means we get players at lots of different levels. Since we don't hold a regular internal competition, we can't enforce tournament rules on everybody who turns up for a casual game. If we were to hold an ongoing internal tournament for the subset of players who want to participate, then obviously all agreed-on tournament rules would apply. But for casual club play we should distinguish between 'chess' rules (en passant, acknowledging check, etc.) vs. 'tournament' rules (touch-move, time controls, etc.).

I agree with the comments about casual play. The touch move rule can be something the players agree on at the start of the game.

Thus far the consensus on this question is trending that this rule is mostly not adhered to with respect to casual play. Granted the sample size is quite small, and to that end, I will respectfully disagree with those that are opposed to the touch move rule. And while I may be in the minority on my stance, I have enjoyed the discourse. I encourage all to continue to communicate through this medium. Peace.

It's your prerogative to disagree. I don't agree that touch-move is a fundamental rule of chess at all. I would argue that touch-release is far more "fundamental" for reasons of calculation and visualization already stated by the others here about 9 months ago, lol. I'm a little slow on the forums, sorry. Touch-move is certainly a standard in any competitve chess setting or competition, but as many already stated the Lowell Chess Club is a casual setting and environment where many people come to learn and play, at varying degrees of skill. I'm 100% for needing to agree to touch-move before the game starts. And even though I hold myself to touch-move, and would expect an opponent that I'm playing with time control to hold himself to touch-move rules without either of us stating them, I would STILL never try to force or enforce that rule upon my opponent without their verbal consent prior to match start. I would consider it poor manners for an intermediate/advanced/veteran player to forego the rule without at the very least asking me if I minded, but even then I would not feel as though I had any right to impose that rule upon them without that verbal agreement between us. I would just remember to get that verbal consent next time. Anyway, you said it was a small pool of feedback even though the majority did not side with you, so I'm adding my voice as well