In OTB matches (I'm guessing OTB stands for "On the Board) when I check someone and they don't see it and make a move that doesn't deal with the check, should I notify my opponent to let them know that they cannot make that move because I can take his/her king on the next move.
It seems a lot of people tell me that I shouldn't do that and just take the King (they aren't very good at chess), but I keep telling them that in chess you never capture the king but they insist on telling me otherwise. The computer won't let me capture the King but I'm still not sure.
So now it got me thinking, since I've never read any rule book. Do you let your opponent know about check or just let it go and take his King.
- Joined
- 20 Jan 07
- Moves
- 24588
Originally posted by Best101Are you for real!
In OTB matches (I'm guessing OTB stands for "On the Board) when I check someone and they don't see it and make a move that doesn't deal with the check, should I notify my opponent to let them know that they cannot make that move because I can take his/her king on the next move.
It seems a lot of people tell me that I shouldn't do that and just take the King ...[text shortened]... e book. Do you let your opponent know about check or just let it go and take his King.
It depends on the tournament. Under USCF rules (I'm not sure about FIDEs) in a normal game you should notify them and you can potentially gain two minutes on your clock (you may need a TD). Blitz rules are now the same though at one point I played in a few blitz tournaments where you were allowed to win by taking the king (prevents the need for arbitration).
Originally posted by Best101Although I've never played USCF blitz chess (game in 5 minutes), apparently the rules in USCF blitz allow you to do what your friends are telling you to do. However, in any USCF game over 5 min per game (quick chess or regular chess), capturing the king isn't allowed. In this case, you just tell the person that he made an illegal move due to the check, and he then must make a legal move to get out of check.
In OTB matches (I'm guessing OTB stands for "On the Board) when I check someone and they don't see it and make a move that doesn't deal with the check, should I notify my opponent to let them know that they cannot make that move because I can take his/her king on the next move.
It seems a lot of people tell me that I shouldn't do that and just take the King e book. Do you let your opponent know about check or just let it go and take his King.
Edit - Ok, apparently USA blitz rules are somewhat complicated. Clearly I'm not up to date on them. There are USCF blitz rules, but blitz games aren't rated by the USCF. There are FIDE blitz rules, and there are also WBCA (World Blitz Chess Association) rules, which may be a little different from USCF rules. Sounds complicated to me, so I'll just stay away from 5 minute games. 🙂
How did you get to 1500+ rating without knowing that it's an illegal move to not deal with the check? Who taught you?! As wind ups go this one is a corker!!
When I was younger I played in hundreds of tournaments and in every one if they make an illegal move you have to tell em and then they take it back. No time added coz they've already wasted time thinking about the illegal move.
Originally posted by zebanoYeah, you're right about potentially getting a two-minute penalty for your opponent's illegal move. You can only get it if the illegal move is made in a sudden death time control, and only if your opponent completes his move by hitting his clock. (USCF Rule 11D)
It depends on the tournament. Under USCF rules (I'm not sure about FIDEs) in a normal game you should notify them and you can potentially gain two minutes on your clock (you may need a TD).
Under blitz rules if you make a faulty move you lose, but only if the opponent discovers it and tells your opponent. You can also accept the faulty move by making another move yourself.
When you are in check you have to deal with this, by the rules.
To take a king is a faulty move.
If your opponent is doing a faulty move, then you've won, only if you discovers it and tell your opponent.
So imagine this happens:
37. Qd4-e5+ Blacks king is in check, but he don't see it.
37. ... h7-h6 Black is doing a faulty move. Now white has to tell him that the move is faulty in order to win.
38. Qe5xKe8 White didn't tell black that his prior move was faulty and White is doing anouther move that is faulty.
38. ... 0-1 Black tells white that white did a faulty move and thus win the game.
Whity says: "But you did a faulty move fefore mine!"
Black says: "By doing a move instead of telling me, you accepted my faulty move. Yours faulty move, however, I discovered and told you. Therefore, i won the game."
I think when your opponent makes a move that doesn't deal with check, you immediately stop your clock, thereby starting his, pick up the piece he moved, replace it on its starting square, and pount out his mistake. There's no need to say anytrhing at all. In fact you can't because the rules do not allow you to speak. If there's a problem after that, stop both clocks and call the arbiter.
Originally posted by AttilaTheHornOne of our players was winning easily on time in the league recently & had his opponent make an illegal move.
I think when your opponent makes a move that doesn't deal with check, you immediately stop your clock, thereby starting his, pick up the piece he moved, replace it on its starting square, and pount out his mistake. There's no need to say anytrhing at all. In fact you can't because the rules do not allow you to speak. If there's a problem after that, stop both clocks and call the arbiter.
It was the last game & everyone was watching & after the illegal move all 4 of us spectators said "that puts you in check" & one of our guys said to the one playing "hit your clock" which he did & the bloke who made the illegal move had to reposition his own piece. The guy's flag fell during the confusion.
I think this is the best approach, because the person who made the illegal move will be flustered & has to reposition his piece himself, think about an alternative move & then remember to re-hit the clock. All the while, his time is dwindling.
Originally posted by SquelchbelchI agree, I do think your approach is better. In that situation, I'd consider it rude (if not completely against the rules) to reposition my opponent's piece after the illegal move. The only time I'd consider touching an opponent's piece (other than capturing it, of course!) is if I had to "j`adoube" one of his pieces because it was too far off-center of a square - and of course, it would be done on my time.
One of our players was winning easily on time in the league recently & had his opponent make an illegal move.
It was the last game & everyone was watching & after the illegal move all 4 of us spectators said "that puts you in check" & one of our guys said to the one playing "hit your clock" which he did & the bloke who made the illegal move had to r lternative move & then remember to re-hit the clock. All the while, his time is dwindling.
Also, under USCF rules, if your opponent makes an illegal move in a sudden-death time control and hits his clock, it's often to your advantage to stop both clocks, summon the TD, and claim an illegal move, which will then entitle you to an extra two minutes on your clock. (I believe FIDE Rule 7.4 also does the same thing, regardless of the time control.)
Also, keep in mind that if you immediately restart your opponent's clock after he makes an illegal move, then the clock's move counter (if it has that feature) will no longer be correct, and might need to be adjusted by the arbiter. (The score sheet is the official record of number of moves made, but you could get confused if you only watch the clock's move counter.)
The only thing that distresses me about your story is that the spectators were coaching the players. This is absolutely not allowed by the rules of chess! Of course, the players can talk to each other or to a TD (arbiter) if making a claim or discussing a problem with the game, and under certain conditions an arbiter can point something out to a player, but spectators are NEVER allowed to interact with the players in any way. That means no talking, no face making, no winking or nodding or rolling of the eyes, no pointing - no nothing! The only time a spectator should talk to anyone is, if he sees an example of intentional cheating, he can point it out to an arbiter (but not the players). Maybe chess in England is a lot more casual than here in the states. 🙂