Go back
Pawn Promotion To Same Colored Bishop

Pawn Promotion To Same Colored Bishop

Only Chess

R
Godless Commie

Glasgow

Joined
06 Jan 04
Moves
171019
Clock
29 Aug 08
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Mephisto2
Let's agree to disagree, and I would certainly do the same as you do in real life situations, the question here was just where is the borderline. As said before, this is like a discussion about the gender of angels, lol. My point was simply: why is it necessary to complete a move, or stop your clock when the game is over before that? The difference in inte ...[text shortened]... not occur before the end of a move (and that part about the clock is a clear example of that).
I guess it makes a difference if an opponent is very short of time.

If an opponent pushes a pawn to the 8th and stops the clock cos they claim it is mate, then their opponent has every right to restart the clock.

In such a circumstance their flag might fall, and they would have lost on time.

S
Caninus Interruptus

2014.05.01

Joined
11 Apr 07
Moves
92274
Clock
29 Aug 08
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Redmike
I guess it makes a difference if an opponent is very short of time.

If an opponent pushes a pawn to the 8th and stops the clock cos they claim it is mate, then their opponent has every right to restart the clock.

In such a circumstance their flag might fall, and they would have lost on time.
Yes, but Mephisto is claiming in this case that merely pushing the pawn [without adding a promoted piece] is checkmate, which takes precedence over the flag falling.

Apparently, under his interpretation, if all legal moves with a certain piece give mate, then merely touching the piece is sufficient to give checkmate.

N
10. O-O

Kalispell, MT

Joined
05 Jul 08
Moves
23554
Clock
29 Aug 08
1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by SwissGambit
Yes, but Mephisto is claiming in this case that merely pushing the pawn [without adding a promoted piece] is checkmate, which takes precedence over the flag falling.

Apparently, under his interpretation, if all legal moves with a certain piece give mate, then merely touching the piece is sufficient to give checkmate.
i think thats logical.

"IF" a piece is touched, it must be moved.
"IF" all of a pieces possible moves produce checkmate


"THEN" the only possibility is checkmate


and "THEREFORE" by touching the piece, there "MUST" be checkmate.

M

St. Paul, Minnesota

Joined
26 Mar 08
Moves
74043
Clock
29 Aug 08
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Nowakowski
i think thats logical.

"IF" a piece is touched, it must be moved.
"IF" all of a pieces possible moves produce checkmate


"THEN" the only possibility is checkmate


and "THEREFORE" by touching the piece, there "MUST" be checkmate.
Agreed, but it is not complete until the move is complete. If merely moving that piece will cause checkmate, then the only possible outcome of touching that piece is checkmate IF the move is completed within the time constraints.

N
10. O-O

Kalispell, MT

Joined
05 Jul 08
Moves
23554
Clock
29 Aug 08
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by MrHand
Agreed, but it is not complete until the move is complete. If merely moving that piece will cause checkmate, then the only possible outcome of touching that piece is checkmate IF the move is completed within the time constraints.
So, now the question is

IF a move is started, and is FORCED to finish, (due to touching) is the process of the move punishable by time?

When their is no other choice after a touch, it seems like the game should continue with the move, as it is the games rules that state you must move it. Once the only possible move is made with the touched piece, then the game should end as time killed it.

This idea is present in several games (non-board)...look at American Football.

M

St. Paul, Minnesota

Joined
26 Mar 08
Moves
74043
Clock
29 Aug 08
Vote Up
Vote Down

The move has to be completed before the flag falls in Chess.

V

Joined
21 Sep 05
Moves
27507
Clock
29 Aug 08
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Nowakowski
i think thats logical.

"IF" a piece is touched, it must be moved.
"IF" all of a pieces possible moves produce checkmate


"THEN" the only possibility is checkmate


and "THEREFORE" by touching the piece, there "MUST" be checkmate.
It is also the player's responsibility to demonstrate that they can play legal moves - this is not taken as an assumption, and hence the rules cover cases of illegal moves, etc.

How far would you extend your logic? In the following position, if Black played Bh6+ and White's flag then immediately fell, would you consider anything other than a win for Black? "Logic" dictates that White must checkmate Black on the next move. And what if White only touched the rook on a6 and then his flag fell? Of course, in each case Black wins. I think the same applies to the earlier promotion example - the moves must be played in full.

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.