Touch-move rule

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

The touch-move rule in chess specifies that, if a player intentionally touches a piece on the board when it is his turn to move, then he or she must move or capture that piece if it is legal to do so. This is a rule of chess that is enforced in all games played in over-the-board competitions. The player claiming a touch-move violation must do so before making a move.

If a player wants to adjust a piece on its square without being required to move it, he/she can announce j’adoube ("I adjust") before touching the piece (Hooper & Whyld 1992:425). A player may not touch the pieces on the board if it is his or her opponent's turn to move.

There is a separate rule that a player who lets go of a piece after making a legal move cannot retract the move.


Details[edit]

If a player having the move touches one of his or her pieces as if having the intention of moving it, then he or she must move it if it can be legally moved. So long as the hand has not left the piece on a new square, the latter can be placed on any accessible square. Accidentally touching a piece, e.g. brushing against it while reaching for another piece, does not count as an intentional touch.

If a player touches a hostile piece, then he or she must capture it if the piece can be captured. If a player touches one of his pieces and an opponent's piece, he or she must make that capture if it is a legal move. Otherwise, he or she is required to move or capture the first of the pieces that he or she touched. If it cannot be determined whether he or she touched his or her own piece or the opponent's piece first, it is assumed that he touched his or her own piece first. If a player touches more than one piece, he or she must move or capture the first piece that can be legally moved or captured. An exception to that is an attempted illegal castling; in that case the king must be moved if possible, but otherwise there is no requirement to move the rook.

When castling, the king must be the first piece touched. If the player touches his rook at the same time as touching the king, he or she must castle with that rook if it is legal to do so. If the player completes a two-square king move without touching a rook, he or she must move the correct rook accordingly if castling in that direction is legal. Otherwise, the move must be withdrawn and another king move made.

When a pawn is moved to its eighth rank, once the player takes his hand off the pawn, it can no longer be substituted for a different move of the pawn. However, the move is not complete until the promoted piece is released on that square (Just & Burg 2003:20–23).

Examples[edit]

Fischer vs. Donner, 1966
a b c d e f g h
8
Chessboard480.svg
c8 black rook
g8 black king
f7 black pawn
g7 black pawn
h7 black pawn
a6 black pawn
f5 black queen
c4 white bishop
d4 white pawn
a3 black bishop
g3 white pawn
a2 white pawn
c2 white rook
f2 white pawn
h2 white pawn
f1 white queen
g1 white king
8
7 7
6 6
5 5
4 4
3 3
2 2
1 1
a b c d e f g h
Black just moved 29...Qg5–f5

In the diagram at left, from a game between future World Champion Bobby Fischer and Jan Hein Donner, White had a probably winning advantage; Black had just moved 29...Qg5–f5 and White fell for a swindle.[1] Fischer touched his bishop, intending to move 30.Bd3, which seems like a natural move, but then realized that Black could play 30...Rxc2, and after 31.Bxf5 Rc1 32.Qxc1 Bxc1, the game would be a draw, because of the opposite-colored bishops endgame. After touching the bishop, he realized that 30.Bd3 was a bad move, but since he was obligated to move the bishop, and other bishop moves were even worse, after several seconds he played 30.Bd3. The queens and rooks were exchanged (as above) and a draw by agreement was reached after the 34th move. Had Fischer won the game, he would have tied with Boris Spassky for first place in the 1966 Piatigorsky Cup tournament (Kashdan 1968:49–50).

Unzicker vs. Fischer, 1960
a b c d e f g h
8
Chessboard480.svg
a8 black rook
c8 black bishop
f8 black rook
g8 black king
c7 black queen
e7 black bishop
f7 black pawn
g7 black pawn
h7 black pawn
a6 black pawn
c6 black pawn
d6 black pawn
e6 black pawn
f6 black knight
g5 white bishop
e4 white pawn
f4 white pawn
c3 white knight
d3 white bishop
g3 white queen
a2 white pawn
b2 white pawn
c2 white pawn
g2 white pawn
h2 white pawn
c1 white king
d1 white rook
h1 white rook
8
7 7
6 6
5 5
4 4
3 3
2 2
1 1
a b c d e f g h
Fischer now touched his h-pawn, compelling him to play 12...h6?? or 12...h5??

The touch-move rule produced an even more disastrous result for Fischer in his game as Black against Wolfgang Unzicker at Buenos Aires 1960.[2] In the position diagrammed at right, Fischer touched his h-pawn, intending to play 12...h6. He then realized that, because of the pin on the g-file, White could simply play 13.Bxh6; 13...gxh6 would be illegal, since it would put Black's king in check by White's queen. Having touched his h-pawn, the touch-move rule required Fischer to play either 12...h6?? or 12...h5??, an almost equally bad move that fatally weakens Black's kingside. Fischer accordingly played 12...h5?? and resigned just ten moves later—his shortest loss ever in a serious game (Mednis 1997:110–11).

Karpov vs. Chernin, 1992
a b c d e f g h
8
Chessboard480.svg
e8 white queen
b7 black rook
c7 black king
f7 white king
g5 white rook
h5 black pawn
e4 white pawn
g4 black pawn
8
7 7
6 6
5 5
4 4
3 3
2 2
1 1
a b c d e f g h
Black moved 53...Kd6+, White touched his queen.

In this position in a rapid game in Tilburg in 1992 between former World Champion Anatoly Karpov and Alexander Chernin,[3] White had just promoted a pawn to a queen on the e8 square. Black made the discovered check 53...Kd6+. Karpov, with very little time remaining, did not see that he was in check and played the illegal move 54.Qe6+. The arbiter required Karpov to play a legal move with his queen instead (since he touched it), and he selected 54.Qe7+?? (54.Qd7+ Rxd7+ 55.Kg6 would still have drawn (Fox & James 1993:198)). After 54...Rxe7+, Karpov lost the game (McDonald 2002:224–25).

Tarrasch vs. Alapin, 1889
a b c d e f g h
8
Chessboard480.svg
a8 black rook
b8 black knight
c8 black bishop
d8 black queen
e8 black king
f8 black bishop
h8 black rook
a7 black pawn
b7 black pawn
c7 black pawn
f7 black pawn
g7 black pawn
h7 black pawn
d6 black pawn
e4 black knight
d3 white pawn
f3 white knight
a2 white pawn
b2 white pawn
c2 white pawn
f2 white pawn
g2 white pawn
h2 white pawn
a1 white rook
b1 white knight
c1 white bishop
d1 white queen
e1 white king
f1 white bishop
h1 white rook
8
7 7
6 6
5 5
4 4
3 3
2 2
1 1
a b c d e f g h
Black touched his king's bishop, mistakenly thinking White had played 5.d2–d4.

In the 1889 game between Siegbert Tarrasch and Semyon Alapin at Breslau,[4] Alapin was expecting 5.d4, the normal move after 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nxe5 d6 4.Nf3 Nxe4 in Petrov's Defence. But by the time he looked at the position he had already touched his king's bishop, intending 5...Be7 in reply to the usual 5.d4, not noticing that White actually played 5.d3 (attacking the black knight). Now compelled to move the bishop, he would lose the knight, so resigned immediately (Chernev & Reinfeld 1949:111).

Adjusting pieces[edit]

If a player wishes to adjust the pieces on their squares without being required to move or capture the piece, he or she can announce j’adoube [ʒaˈdub], (French: I adjust), or words to that effect in other languages. J’adoube is internationally recognised by chess players as announcing the intent to make incidental contact with their pieces.

The phrase is used to give warning from a player to his or her opponent that he or she is about to touch a piece on the board, typically to centralise it on its square, without the intent of making a move with it. The touched piece rule requires that such a warning be given.[5] Whilst this French term is customary, it is not obligatory; other similar indications may be used.[5] A player may adjust a piece in this way only when it is his turn to move.[6]

Example of misuse[edit]

There have been occasions in chess history when a player has uttered j’adoube after making a losing move in order to retract it, thus attempting to avoid the touch-move rule. Such behaviour is regarded as cheating (see cheating in chess). The Yugoslav Grandmaster Milan Matulović was nicknamed "J’adoubovic" after such an incident (Hooper & Whyld 1992:185,252) (Lombardy & Daniels 1975:104).

History[edit]

Lindermann vs. Echtermeyer, 1893
a b c d e f g h
8
Chessboard480.svg
a8 black rook
b8 black knight
c8 black bishop
e8 black king
f8 black bishop
g8 black knight
h8 black rook
a7 black pawn
b7 black pawn
c7 black pawn
e7 black pawn
f7 black pawn
g7 black pawn
h7 black pawn
d5 black queen
a2 white pawn
b2 white pawn
c2 white pawn
d2 white pawn
f2 white pawn
g2 white pawn
h2 white pawn
a1 white rook
b1 white knight
c1 white bishop
d1 white queen
e1 white king
f1 white bishop
g1 white knight
h1 white rook
8
7 7
6 6
5 5
4 4
3 3
2 2
1 1
a b c d e f g h
White, having made an illegal move, was compelled to play instead 3.Ke2?? here, allowing 3...Qe4#

The touch-move rule has existed for centuries. In the Middle Ages strict rules were considered necessary because chess was played for stakes. Luis Ramirez de Lucena gave the rule in his 1497 book Arte de Axdres (Sunnucks 1970:462). Benjamin Franklin referred to it in his 1786 essay The morals of chess (Truzzi 1974:14).[7] At one time the rule also required the player who played an illegal move to move his king. In the first half of the nineteenth century, Rule XIII of the London Chess Club provided:

If a player make a false move, i.e., play a Piece or Pawn to any square to which it cannot legally be moved, his adversary has the choice of three penalties; viz., 1st, of compelling him to let the Piece or Pawn remain on the square to which he played it; 2nd, to move correctly to another square; 3rd, to replace the Piece or Pawn and move his King. (Staunton 1848:37) (Marache 1866:24)

While this rule existed, it occasionally led to tragicomedies such as in the 1893 game between Lindermann and Echtermeyer, at Kiel.[8] In that game, after 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 White, probably intending the usual 3.Nc3, instead placed his queen's bishop on c3. Since that move was illegal, White was compelled to instead move his king. After the forced 3.Ke2??, Black gave checkmate with 3...Qe4# (Chernev 1974:119).

In England, the 1862 laws of the British Chess Association rejected the above rule. The Association's Law VII provided instead that if a player made an illegal move, "he must, at the choice of the opponent, and according to the case, either move his own man legally, capture the man legally, or move any other man legally moveable." (Gossip & Lipschütz 1902:31) (Steinitz 1889:xxi).[9] The German chess master Siegbert Tarrasch wrote in The Game of Chess (originally published in 1931 as Das Schachspiel) that the former rule requiring a player who made an illegal move to move his king had only been changed a few years earlier (Tarrasch 1938:37).[10]

See also[edit]

Notes[edit]

  1. ^ Fischer vs. Donner, Santa Monica 1966
  2. ^ Unzicker vs. Fischer, Buenos Aires 1960
  3. ^ Karpov vs. Chernin, Tilburg 1992
  4. ^ Tarrasch vs. Alapin
  5. ^ a b FIDE Laws of Chess Article 4.2
  6. ^ FIDE Laws of Chess Article 12.6 and 4.2
  7. ^ Franklin wrote in his essay, first published in the Columbian Magazine in Philadelphia, that one of the "laws of the game" was that "if you touch a piece, you must move it somewhere; if you set it down, you must let it stand."
  8. ^ Lindemann vs. Echtermeyer, Kiel 1893
  9. ^ Steinitz, unlike Gossip and Lipschütz, did not give a specific date for the Laws of Chess that he set forth, but wrote, "We approve in the main of the Code of Laws of the British Chess Association, which has been adopted in many Chess Congresses." Steinitz, p. xx.
  10. ^ Tarrasch wrote, "If a player makes a move not permitted by the rules of the game or if he touches either an enemy man which cannot be taken or one of his own which cannot be moved then until recently there was a rule that as a penalty he must move his King (but not castle). ... This rule was altered a few years ago—and rightly so." Tarrasch, p. 37.

References[edit]