Draw or Loss?

and as I see in the other thread they do not know yet.

Even if you could checkmate IF there was enough time you still messed up by not managing your time as well as you should have. Eh, chances of that happening are slim to none anyways.

Every tournament chess player knows, or should know, that a move is complete once they've taken their hand off the piece. They still need to hit the clock after they've completed their move or risk losing/drawing on time unless the resulting position is checkmate or a draw (stalemate, insufficient material). 

It happens pretty frequently.

Clearly you haven't played in enough events to know the rules.

Also, the rules aren't even the same for USCF and FIDE.

What is explained above is FIDE.

For USCF (since I see you are also in the United States), which these rules only apply for NON-FIDE rated events, the result would be a win for White UNLESS Black has lifted the rook off the board!

With USCF, it doesn't matter is mate is possible or not with a legal series of moves.  It's strictly about mating material.  If you have a Pawn, Rook, Queen, Two Bishops, or Bishop and Knight (or any combination of these - Keep in mind, if you have a Knight and Pawn, you have a pawn, therefore you fit the criteria), you win if your opponent's clock runs out.

HOWEVER, there is one exception, and let's not confuse 40th move in a 40/2, SD/1 event with checkmate.

Black is to make his 40th move in a time control of 40/2, SD/1.  Black is about to play 40...Rg7.  If Black lifts the Rook off the g2 square, and his clock runs out while either the Rook is airborne or during the time between releasing the piece and hitting the clock, and 40...Rg7 is just a normal move making it White's 41st move, Black has lost if White has sufficient mating material, so if White has a legal 41st move and mating material, Black has lost on time, despite the added hour now - he had to have at least a fraction of a second when he hit the clock.

HOWEVER, let's say instead that 40...Rg7 is CHECKMATE!  Mate supercedes the clock and ends the game.  If the Rook was lifted off the g2-square before the clock ran out, and the Rook was either airborne, or already placed on g7 with Black about to hit the clock and the clock falls, Black still wins (unlike FIDE, where the move must be completed) as checkmate supercedes any flag called.  If the butt of the Rook is still touching g2 (or whatever its original square was) when White calls flag, Black loses (unless White has Insufficient Mating Material with no forced mate).

I think in english the right terms are "move is made" when take hand off the piece/pieces, and "move is complete" when you hit the clock.

In Italy is "mossa eseguita" and "mossa completata".

But the move is not only this... there's the touch, the taking of the piece, the taking of opponent piece, the move of the piece, the pomotion, ecc... I'm sure you all know... (lapalisse...) and for every moment there are different rules. 

9.7 is a competition rule, is for the clock/time, and does not eliminate other rules (as some inexperienced people want to make believe in other thread).

You're correct, I should not have said "completed" interchangeably with "made". The move is "complete" only if the resulting position is checkmate or an immediate draw such as stalemate. Otherwise, to "complete" the move, you must also hit the clock.

....

I suggest that in the scenario in post 9 the result is a draw since once the rook is touched, there are no combinations of moves by which White can win (since Black is compelled to move the rook and deliver mate). 

By way of precident I refer to Gijssen's assessment of the question beginning with "Dear, Mr. Gijssen. I would like to revisit a controversial issue that was discussed in your August 2009 column."

Posted here: http://arbitri.lombardiascacchi.com/Chesscafe/2009_10.pdf

Thanks for the link, landloch. 

I agree, as I stated earlier, the position is drawn. If a side delivers checkmate on the board, he doesn't need to hit his clock to complete his move in such a scenario. Checkmate ends the game.  Picking up a piece is not sufficient to "make" a move. If your flag falls before you make your move, you cannot win the game. But in that precise position, there is no way for the opponent to win either. Hence the draw.

I agree, Teddyhead.

The position in post #9 is with the black bishop added on f8, and black has touched his rook before his flag fell.

Geurt Gijssen says he would use the information that black has touched his rook. And he says that this is his personal opinion, shared by many others at that FIDE congress after explanation, while he also says that some do not share this opinion, considering the whole matter to be too complicated and too detailed.

I would agree with Geurt Gijssen's logic.

Touching the rook changes the position in that it limits the choice of moves that can be made from it.

I would appreciate arbiters who decide as Geurt Gijssen on this, while I would most probably not protest against decisions of arbiters who do not include the information that the piece has been touched.

 The question about black having touched the rook could get interesting.  Although the rule says that a touched piece must be moved, it is usually up to the opponent to make the claim that the piece was touched and have the arbiter enforce the rule.  If no claim is made, the rule is not enforced.

In this case, I can see White saying,"I didn't see him touch the rook."  At the same time, Black is saying "I touched the rook and would have had to move it."

I have actually lost an armaggedon game where I had a piece in my hand, ready to deliver the mate when my opponent called my flag. I understand Gijssen's logic, but I believe it is wrong. The checkmate had not yet occurred on the board, and therefore the clock took precedence. 

Changing the topic.  Has  anyone else noticed that the V.2 version of the Post 9 diagram is different than the V.3 version?  Trying to get an idea across is difficult if you're looking at one diagram and your audience is looking at another.

These are interesting points! I have been assuming the game is played under FIDE conditions, that is, with an arbiter watching the game the whole time. If it is not provable that Black touched the Rook then it should be a win for White.

As to Black touching a piece, White cannot counter this be failing to claim:

"4.3 Except as provided in Article 4.2, if the player having the move touches on the chessboard, with the intention of moving or capturing:

I would actually agree that in this case you should have lost, unless ... mate was the only move you could have made with the held piece and you were playing Black (as a draw by White in armaggedon is actually a loss). 

In any event, situations like those in post 9 are ambiguous enough under the current rules that I would not be too distraught by a ruling opposite to the one I've proposed.  

landloch

In general, what I hypothesized isn't going to happen.  However, most of the tournaments that I play in have one TD (two at the most).  They usually watch the high-level games.  At the lower levels, we're dependent on the honesty of our opponents.  To date all of my opponents have complied with the touch-move rule when they belatedly discover they're about to make a poor move, but I know a few who would deny that they touched a piece if it were to their advantage, and they thought that they could get away with it.

SmyslovFan, Gijssen's logic does not make your armageddon game a win for you. It does not make the position on the board of your armageddon game a position with mate on the board.

The only thing Gijssen's logic might have done to your armageddon game --- if as landloch pointed out the only legal move with the piece you had touched was giving the mate, so that when your flag had fallen your opponent could no longer win the position with any series of legal moves --- would have been to make your game a draw.

no point of discussion black lost on time

Discussion issues?

Re-read the whole thread, and re-think, if possible.