I believe your move is complete when you release a piece or pawn onto a new square, whether you press your clock or not, since you are not free to make another move anyway due to the rules. What if a player makes a move and forgets to press the clock ? This happens frequently and the other player does NOT have to wait till you do press your clock to make a move , though he may just sit there and let your time run. Some will remind an opponent that they forgot their clock, others will not.
Kasparov's Anger

When Kasparov was asked what he thought about Judit Polgar, the immensely talented Hungarian chess genius, he replied that she is a,"trained dog" (as in, she was brought up by her father to play chess and has no real talent.) Is this proper behavior from the World Champion? I respected Kasparov very much, but after this comment I am truly taken aback.
I have never heard this before, do you have a reliable source for this ?
HERE IS THE SOURCE, FOR EVERYONE WHO IS ASKING
END GAME, by Dominic Lawson, chapter 2, page 22, line 13(I quote): ...when he was asked his opinion of the chessplaying talent of the Hungarian girl prodigy Judit Polgar, who was taught nothing but chess from infancy by an obsessive father, Kasparov described her as a 'trained dog'.
In The Inner Game (Lawson), Short refers to Judit as Lassie, in the same vein.

Wait, why is she a "trained dog" but the dozens of other male chess players trained from an early age are not? Or perhaps it's not a male/female thing, perhaps he just resents her for some other reason, who knows. I'd also like to see a souce for that comment. (edit : nevermind, see the question was answered)

My wife's opinion: "¿¡De qué le sirve al Kasparov ser tan bueno (para jugar ajedrez)... si no tiene corazón?!" lol
I believe that XavierPadilla's wife said something to the effect of, "What use is it to Kasparov to be so good (at playing chess)...if he doesn't have a heart?"
By the way, the comment about Kasparov being a "Russian blowhard" might have been rooted in the way many people who have been brought up in the non-agressive Western culture see the culturally-appropriate behavior of Russians as being overly agressive. An example of this would be when one of my uncles heard two ladies talking in Russian to each other (this happened at his workplace, where many languages are spoken) and thought they were really going at it. He called for someone who understood Russian to see what was going on, and to see whether intervention would be necessary. It turned out that they were having a pleasant conversation about a baby (I can't remember whether it was one of the ladies who'd just had a baby, or whether it was one of their friends or relatives). Just goes to show that different things are viewed as being severe, or non-serious, in different cultures.
I admit that I know little or nothing about Russian culture, so this post may be a bit off-base.

Kasparov is a russian blowhard. Pay no attention to his words, they are meaningless.
stupid american always the first to point out race in a negative way, also make statements like 'his words are meaningless'.

First off I think it is silly when players like Aronian say that women can't play chess - or some idiotic comments like that -
The comment by Kasparov about Polgar looks like it applies just to Polgar - there is not enough information given to determine whether his reference was directed towards all women players or not -
In general there is sort of this "soap opera" type stuff that goes on in chess - I can only bring up the "toilet-gate" scandal to name one such occassion -
Then of course there are all of the portrayals of Bobby Fischer and what he said about the Russians, the US, etc...
I still have not found out why chess players say extrememly stupid stuff - but I guess you could reference any competitive game - and when players get in the heat of competition - maybe there are these type of exchanges that - frankly - do not add to the game as far as I am concerned.

Kasparov is a russian blowhard. Pay no attention to his words, they are meaningless.
stupid american always the first to point out race in a negative way, also make statements like 'his words are meaningless'.
Yeah " Russian blow hard " is almost as bad as " supid American" ! LOL Oh, and I thought Russian is a nationality , NOT a race......

First off I think it is silly when players like Aronian say that women can't play chess - or some idiotic comments like that -
The comment by Kasparov about Polgar looks like it applies just to Polgar - there is not enough information given to determine whether his reference was directed towards all women players or not -
In general there is sort of this "soap opera" type stuff that goes on in chess - I can only bring up the "toilet-gate" scandal to name one such occassion -
Then of course there are all of the portrayals of Bobby Fischer and what he said about the Russians, the US, etc...
I still have not found out why chess players say extrememly stupid stuff - but I guess you could reference any competitive game - and when players get in the heat of competition - maybe there are these type of exchanges that - frankly - do not add to the game as far as I am concerned.
Chess certainly has its "ugly side" I suppose but is saying stupid/offensive things even comparable to say a bench clearing brawl in baseball or a stampede at a soccer game, or fights that result in serious injury and even death?! Give chess a break ! Its still very civilized compared to almost any physical sport you wanna name.

i like how everyone is even trying to compare polgar to kasparov..i laugh..
I dont think anyone is comparing her chess ability to Kasparov's, at least not seriously. However, Kasparov was video taped taking a move back against her and this says a LOT about Kasparov and it isnt good ! It clearly shows he would certainly cheat to win a game and that black mark will never go away.

"According to chess rules, once a player has released a piece s/he cannot make a different move"
Not sure when this changed, or if I'm confusing FIDE rules with USCF, but the last I checked, a player's move is not complete until he touches the clock. The piece touch is only rellevant in that that piece must be moved, but it is perfectly legal to touch a piece, release it, move it, release it, move it back, think a while, etc. as long as all the time is coming off your own clock.
The move is not complete until the clock is pushed. But the move is determined as soon as your hand releases from the piece. So you cannot put a piece on a square, let go of it, decide you don't like that move and switch to a different one.
In between releasing the piece and pushing the clock your move is determined, but not yet completed. This is the time to claim a draw on threefold repetition or 50 move rule, or to offer a draw.
I don't agree with this at all. In my opinion the move is completed as soon as you take your fingers off the piece. The other player doesn't have to wait for you to hit your clock before they make their move. The clock is irrelevant as far as the game is concerned, if neither player wanted to even touch the clock during the game then they are officially and technically entitled to not bother. I think that's the FIDE rules but I have no idea what the USCF rules are. It's also the rules in my country as far as I am aware.
AMcHarg, if you're going to quote someone and then reply, make sure you read what they say first. The person of whom you took the quote off said that if they let go of a piece, then that piece must be moved there. However, your turn is not yet finished as that is a time to declare threefold repetition, offer a draw or resign. You wrote what Loomis wrote but without the second half of what he wrote. Please make sure you read EXACTLY what someone writes before you quote them and write down that you disagree with them and why...

Actually , the "correct" way to claim a draw by repetition of position is to NOT actually play the move but to call an arbiter, write the move down and tell the arbiter you intend to play this move that will cause the 3-fold repetition before actually playing the move on the board. I made such a claim 2 years ago in Figueira De Foz and the arbiter said I was one of very few that made the claim "properly".
When Kasparov was asked what he thought about Judit Polgar, the immensely talented Hungarian chess genius, he replied that she is a,"trained dog" (as in, she was brought up by her father to play chess and has no real talent.) Is this proper behavior from the World Champion? I respected Kasparov very much, but after this comment I am truly taken aback.
I have never heard this before, do you have a reliable source for this ?
HERE IS THE SOURCE, FOR EVERYONE WHO IS ASKING
END GAME, by Dominic Lawson, chapter 2, page 22, line 13(I quote): ...when he was asked his opinion of the chessplaying talent of the Hungarian girl prodigy Judit Polgar, who was taught nothing but chess from infancy by an obsessive father, Kasparov described her as a 'trained dog'.