This seems like very reasonable way of handling this to me!
Touch-move rule: advantage?
Sort:
I've only been to a couple of the meetings of the chess club, at mill no.5. I love chess, and I like to consider myself a gentleman on the table. I have never held an opponent to the touch-move rule otb, without agreeing to it prior to game start. Touch-release is a standard, I think, even novices must be held to. I understand that it is newer and weaker players that are going to be disadvantaged by touch-move, most. So because of the mostly friendly and casual nature of the chess club, where people are coming to learn and enjoy the game, I've never even requested touch-move before a game. Also, I think that most intermediate/advanced or veteran players hold THEMSELVES to the touch-move standard as a means of self discipline, and also as a tool to punish themselves for not seeing the end position in advance. I know I certainly do, and when first using the touch-move rule, I used it as a way to force myself to visualize the board before making the move, and to punish myself for forgetting to do so. It's more of an unspoken consent between two intermediate/advanced players that touch-move is in effect. If you're playing with clocks, you should be well versed enough to know touch-move is standard in competitive play, even if that play is friendly - and that it coincides with any player who considers themself at least intermediate level or beyond. I would think it very poor taste if an opponent I was challenging with a clock tried moving another piece after first touching a different one, without, at the very least, asking if I minded. I haven't seen any arguments at the chess club yet, but I've only appeared in person twice, and that was at Mill No.5 I remember being told the library sessions are larger. Anyway, hope to see you all soon at one of the Sunday sessions. Thanks - Matt
Hello, all. With regard to the touch-move rule, the consensus amongst all that responded, save myself, is: it is okay to violate this rule in casual play ... and it is okay to observe the aforementioned if both parties agree to it because this rule is mostly for competitive atmospheres. I would argue that casual chess can and is competitive. To that end, I believe that novices can learn by ignoring this rule if the casual setting is to be also an instructive setting - not saying it is, or that it should be. I am also able to concede that at times my competitive nature can and often does get the better of me. Viewed through the lens of your response, I am the outlier.
All of that notwithstanding, can we agree that amongst stronger players - and I am only speaking about stronger players here - there is an advantage to grabbing a piece, realizing you have made a mistake, then correcting this mistake by moving another piece? e.g., you will lose the game, position, a critical piece amplified by the stage of the game. Because even in a casual setting, your opponent still has the objective of checkmate in mind.
The point I was trying to highlight is that - and these are very specific variables:
In none of the games, that lead to this quasi-diatribe, did this happen in the opening or the middle game.
I would like to solicit responses that take these factors into account.