If a player does not touch the piece intentionally, then the touch move rule does not apply.
A nice anecdote: An old master, deep, deep in thought, takes a sip at his tea, puts the cup down again. Takes his bishop in his hand. Absentmindedly stirs his tea - with the bishop. And puts the bishop back onto its square, still deep in thought... ;-)
http://www.fide.com/fide/handbook.html?id=124&view=article
Check out Article 4: The act of moving the pieces.
So what happened in the game cited in #2?
Basically, my opponent wanted to play Rf1xf6+ (checking my King on f8). My opponent had just sacrificed a Bishop to undermine my kingside pawns and generate a very dangerous attack, so it was obviously the best move, and I knew good and well what the intention was. But a slip of the mouse landed the Rook on f3, where it hung to my Knight with check. My opponent resigned in disgust because the tide shifted dramatically. I actually felt bad.
So this happened on chess.com, but what if it were to happen OTB? A Rook, say, could fall on its base onto a square in a similar manner.
http://www.fide.com/fide/handbook.html?id=124&view=article
Check out Article 4: The act of moving the pieces.
Thanks, but this is actually the same website I found this afternoon, and it doesn't address the issue of accidental touching.
CM ilmago: Thanks for the info.
In case 3., you can call the arbiter, and he may not only restore the position before that move (including touch move for the opponent if the piece can be moved somewhere legally), but also the times on the clock if necessary.
For this, see 6.13 in the rules given in the link above.
If the arbiter deems it appropriate, he has also options such as given in 13.4, for example, he may give you 2 extra minutes of time to compensate for the disturbance.
http://www.fide.com/fide/handbook.html?id=124&view=article
Check out Article 4: The act of moving the pieces.
Thanks, but this is actually the same website I found this afternoon, and it doesn't address the issue of accidental touching.
CM ilmago: Thanks for the info.
You're looking but not seeing. The word "deliberately" is used often enough to give clear guidance.
Do the Sofia rules prevent someone from being allowed to say "I adjust" as per 4.2 ?
In case 3., you can call the arbiter, and he may not only restore the position before that move (including touch move for the opponent if the piece can be moved somewhere legally), but also the times on the clock if necessary.
For this, see 6.13 in the rules given in the link above.
If the arbiter deems it appropriate, he has also options such as given in 13.4, for example, he may give you 2 extra minutes of time to compensate for the disturbance.
Yeah... I should have deduced that.
For 2., I would say that if the piece lands on a possible destination square and stands there, this would look as a regular move to me (I know no rule that forbids a player to make a move by throwing the piece to its new square ;-) ), and because the player has let go of the piece, this move would be final according to touch move.
However, I have never experienced that in such a case, the "thrown" piece really remains standing on its final square. If the piece just lies somewhere on the board, this would be no move in my eyes, but it would fall under "knocking a piece over", so the square a piece falls upon without standing there would not be the obligatory destination square for that move, of course. (Of course, as in all cases of pieces knocked over, the "offender" has to put the pieces back on the right squares using his own time.)
Do the Sofia rules prevent someone from being allowed to say "I adjust" as per 4.2 ?
No, they don't.
Sofia rules are about draw offers. The intention of these Sofia rules is to avoid short draws, trying to make games more attractive for spectators.
For 2., I would say that if the piece lands on a possible destination square and stands there, this would look as a regular move to me (I know no rule that forbids a player to make a move by throwing the piece to its new square ;-) ), and because the player has let go of the piece, this move would be final according to touch move.
So if the piece is dropped onto a square, the player can quickly move it to the intended square; but if he doesn't make an effort to "fix" it, then that's his move? Sounds reasonable to me. This means that accidentally dropping a piece is analogous to the accidental touching of a piece, both of which would simply be ignored.
For 2., I would say that if the piece lands on a possible destination square and stands there, this would look as a regular move to me (I know no rule that forbids a player to make a move by throwing the piece to its new square ;-) ), and because the player has let go of the piece, this move would be final according to touch move.
So if the piece is dropped onto a square, the player can quickly move it to the intended square; but if he doesn't make an effort to "fix" it, then that's his move? Sounds reasonable to me. This means that accidentally dropping a piece is analogous to the accidental touching of a piece, both of which would simply be ignored.
No, I would not say so. I would say it does not matter how quickly the player acts after dropping the piece.
To me, it would matter if the piece gets to stand on a new square after being dropped or if it lies somewhere.
If the piece stands upright on a possible destination square, then one might well think and say that a move has been made. (And that because the player has let go of the piece, the move could be considered final und unchangeable.) If the piece just lies somewhere, I would not call it "making a move" , but I would think of it as knocking over the piece before the move was finished, so while the player will have to move this piece he has started to move, he would not have to put it onto the square it has accidentally come to lie on. He will have all the time in the world (well, limited by the time on his clock, of course) to take up the piece lying on the board and finish the move by choosing a destination square for it.
Yes, actually, that sounds most reasonable to me.
Also, the rules speak of "when a piece has been released on a square ..." and not of "... released in mid-air ...", so at closer inspection, the rules of article 4.6 clearly do not intend to be applied to pieces "thrown" or dropped accidentally.
The whole "dropping en route" thing really doesn't happen OTB. I've never seen it. But mouse slips online are pretty common, especially in blitz. I wouldn't worry about it.
For #1, to clarify the difference between deliberately and accidentally touching a piece, I think it's mostly to do with what part of your hand you touch the piece with. If you touch a piece with your fingertips, as if you're going to pick it up, then that would seem deliberate. If you're reaching for the pawn in front of your king, but your wrist brushes the king, then that would be accidental. That sort of thing happens a lot OTB. Actually, I'd say the most common accidental contact OTB is people knocking over their rooks on the starting squares with their arms or elbows while reaching for pieces near the center of the board.
Your opponent may have been disgusted with himself, but by resigning he demonstrated good sportsmanship.
Of course had this been at an otb tournament he could have taken his case to the arbiter that he didn't intend to move the rook to f3, and then what would YOU have done? Would you have told the arbiter, yes I am sure his intent was to play Rf1xf6+?
Without getting sidetracked by the player's strength let's just say it was an "obvious" move for a player of his ability.
Had this happened to me, I would have supported the other player's claim. My fault for allowing him to get that position in the first place, but I'm not going to be a bad sport about it. Besides, pieces that are thrown or dropped aren't delibertately being released on a square, as per the rules.
I hope that all tournament participants (or at least most of them) would show such good sportsmanship as well. Your opinion is encouraging.
But Fromper raises a good point: mouse slips are common, and in rated games they are apparently permanent. We agree that, OTB, if a Rook is dropped on a destination square en route to its real one, the player would be allowed to correct it. But online, the player's just out of luck?
You may find these related discussions illuminating ...
honor-vs-pragmatism-chesscom-and-precolonial-ideology
Can anyone clarify some rules of chess (mainly etiquette) that aren't clear in the FIDE rules listed on their website?... at least not on the webpage I found.
1. If a player "deliberately" touches a piece, he has to move it or capture it, whichever applies, etc. But if the player "accidentally" touches a piece, is that rule still enforced?
2. If a player deliberately picks up a piece to move it, but drops it en route to the intended square (thus letting go), and the square on which it falls would be a legal move, is the player allowed to go ahead and make the intended move? (This happened to my opponent in a recent game.)
3. If a player makes an illegal move and the player discovers it right away, it seems that all he has to do is correct himself by making a legal move with that piece (although I may have misunderstood that one). But what should happen if a player inadvertently makes an illegal move (which his opponent catches right away) and presses his clock, turning the time over to the opponent?