Correspondence Chess Rules for Variant-Chess

...

All games that started before August 7 are completed, so this can can be added to the main text instead of being an addendum.

Thanks Martin0 for keeping track of this. I'll update the text tomorrow. I want to do it carefully to make sure it's done correctly.

I removed the "Addendum" so all rules are now in a single body. I also added section headings:

(1) General, (2) Time control..., (3) Non-players...

For historical posterity, the former rules were as follows (games that started prior to August 7, 2019):

14. Time control formerly did not include: "A maximum of three time-warnings are allowed per player every 40 moves. The fourth time-warning is a loss. Every 40 moves the limit is refreshed."

Also, vacation time has been increased from 4 to 14 days. The following is now obsolete:

15. Vacation time: Each player may once per 40 moves, take four vacation days (added to the 3-day move limit, for a total of 7 days for a move). ...

Thanks for everyone's input in developing and updating the rules list.

Can we get rid of this touch rule? In my mind touch move does not make sense when playing online. If someone writes Kf3 when they meant Nf3 for example, then I don't think they should be required to move their king after it is pointed out that their move is illegal. Below is the rule from US Chess CC rules:

"An impossible move is a move which cannot be played as recorded. Notify your opponent immediately of your finding. An impossible move or an illegible move in no way obliges the player to move the piece in question. In a case of an ambiguous move, the ambiguous move must be clarified and executed. For example, if your opponent writes Nd2 and either Nbd2 or Nfd2 can be made, the person writing the ambiguous move must execute Nbd2 or Nfd2. Clerical errors are binding and once posted, can in no way be taken back."

I think that makes sense, and in the few cases someone makes an illegal move, it will let the game continue with better quality. I'll leave this here for 1-2 weeks to see if anyone else has comments. If nobody has objections I'll then update the rules. (original post). Thanks for reviewing the rules, and sharing your ideas.

I wasn't aware of that rule and yeah it doesn't seem right. If someone hits B instead of N, forcing them to move the bishop seems daft, unless of course both are legal moves.

For the sake of clarity, if somehow typed 17 Nxf7+ instead of 17. Bxf7+, where both moves are legal except the former doesn't deliver check, have they posted a legal move, or is the intent to play Bx clear enough (by specifically typing +) to give the benefit of the doubt?  The N and B are next to each other, it's a viable typo.

Only makes sense to me that this rule takes precedence:

8. Missing or mistaken announcement of check, capture, or "e.p." does not invalidate a move.

We can't be debating intent here.

I was wondering if Player A runs out of time, but Player B cannot checkmate Player A by any legal moves, or if the only way for Player B to checkmate Player A is through a helpmate, does Player A still lose?

While it is not stated here, variants typically use the FIDE laws of chess for these rules, unless otherwise stated.

In this case:

"A.4.3 To claim a win on time, the claimant may stop the chessclock and notify the arbiter. However, the game is drawn if the position is such that the claimant cannot checkmate the player’s king by any possible series of legal moves"

In your scenario, the game is drawn if player B can not checkmate by any possible series of legal moves. If a helpmate is possible, then player A still lose.

That was my understanding of the rules. If Player A can only lose through the least optimal legal moves, then he can still legally lose, and as such loses the game. Even if the suboptimal moves needed to be played are so bad that even a beginner wouldn't make them, it's still a loss. Where Player B cannot legally win, it's a draw by time out.

Announcement of vacation time must be done in the game thread itself.

If you think about this, this is too self-explaining. Your opponent or mod cannot be expected to keep track of what is posted in other threads than the game thread.

Thanks for the information you three!

Just a reminder to update the rules. This was posted 3 weeks ago.

I'm up at 6am on a Sunday morning, and Martin is posting chess stuff 3 hours ago. Do you sleep?

Some nights I sleep better than others...

According to my watch I slept 21:19-00:39 and 04:13-07:40. It's not that uncommon that I browse the web a bit if I wake up in the middle of the night and unable to immediately get back to sleep. Usually I'm able to get back to sleep in a shorter time though. 

Thanks for the reminder. I just changed rule-11 as follows:

11. If your opponent announces an illegal move, notify your opponent. He/she must then submit a different move. The player is not obliged to move the same piece in question.

The former "touch-rule" has been removed. I agree this is better and it slightly simplifies the rules.

Thanks, looks good @vickalan.

I would like to propose two small changes to the rules wrt time warnings.

1. The moderator of a game can issue a time warning.

2. When there is a known bug in the system of forum notifications, the time warning must be given in the forum game but also on top of that with a personal message to the opponent.

I thought the rules would be changed to reflect actual practice:

Vacation is allowed after a time warning is issued

Requirement for announcing vacation before using it is subsequently voided along with 17 day wording (due to an additional day of the time warning).

Which brings a question:

Is the 4th time warning (within 40 moves) subject to vacation also?