Touch Move Violation at TOP CHESS EVENT

Recently, I watched a YouTube video on the recently concluded Grand Chess Prix. 

Here, I watched GM Praggnanda face off against GM Deac-Bogdan in an elite chess tournament. Let's keep in mind that both players are doing extremely well at this point. White eventually won the game, but I believe this result should have been the opposite. Before I explain to you what happened, it is imperative for us to look into what the touch move is. 

As defined per Arbiter Handbook: 4.8 A player forfeits his right to claim against his opponent’s violation of Articles
4.1 – 4.7 once the player touches a piece with the intention of moving or
capturing it 

In other words, it emphasizes that once a player touches a piece with the intent of moving it (as the White GM did), they are bound by that move, assuming it is legal.

Prag vs Bogdan 3:46

At 3:46, (3 minutes, 46 seconds of the video,) Pragganda physically moves his knight to h4, (a blunder that loses a piece instantly), which would've instantly lost the game had he played it. His opponent (Bogdan-Deac) is away from the board.

He doesn't release the piece from his hand, yet he physically moves the piece over the board and switches his move mid-way. This automatically is an indecent act at best, and at worst, a violation of the fair rules of tournament play. 

When White moved their knight physically to h4, they signified that they were willing to play that move. The arbiter handbook emphasizes that once a player has touched a piece while moving it, they are bound to make that move, assuming it is legal. 

Did Pragganda make that move mid-way? Was the move legal? 

All the answers to the above are yes. 

FIDE Rules:

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

4.3.1 one or more of his/her own pieces, he/she must move the first piece touched that can be moved.

4.7 When, as a legal move or part of a legal move, a piece has been released on a square, it cannot be moved to another square on this move.

Pragganda moved the piece that he touched. So no violation of 4.3. He did not release the knight on h4. So no violation of 4.7. He did release the knight on its original square, but that's not a legal move, so 4.7 doesn't apply to that. I see no violation of the rules.

• Rule 4.3: "if the player having the move touches on the chessboard, with the intention of moving or capturing... one or more of his/her own pieces, he/she must move the first piece touched that can be moved."

This rule is designed to ensure that, if a player touches their own piece with the intent of moving that piece, they commit to moving that piece. The crucial part is the “intention of moving or capturing”. When Pragganda moved the knight to h4, it was evident that he intended to play that move.

Thx for keeping up the nice post u make here on chess,com but i have a question on this you said "He doesn't release the piece from his hand "

so he have to move the piece and he can take it anywhere he like if its legit ,,, and when he release the hand from the move it is final move am i wrong ? but he knew he did something wrong se how he looks around right after  

In the specific situation mentioned above, it is clear he physically moved his knight to h4. While you argue that he did not release the piece on the square, you must acknowledge that he physically moved the knight onto that square. This action alone implies his desire to make that move.

Secondly, Rule 4.7 is designed to prevent players from making their move and then changing their minds after releasing it. In GM Pragganda’s place, he had in effect “released” the knight onto that square. The subsequent attempt to change the move without releasing the move is where the touch move applies. 

Changing the move without releasing the piece contradicts the spirit of the touch move rule, at the very best. 

At the very worst, it’s a clear violation of tournament play.

Prag touches a piece, then moves that piece. What is the problem?

1) The touch-move rule is intended to prevent such potential disputes and ambiguities during a game. When a player physically moves their piece to a square, it signals their intent to play that move. Allowing such change could lead to confusion and disputes, which is what the rule seeks to prevent.

2) To maintain fairness in chess, it is essential to interpret the rules consistently.

3) The spirit of the touch-move aligns with the rules of fair play in chess. It is unethical to play a move over the board, and change mid-way. How would you feel if your opponent consistently played a move over the board, and then switched mid-way?

He played the move over the board. He then switched mid-way. He did it in a discreet way when his opponent was not looking. Please read the above.

He put it back and relese it so he have to put it the place he went too the first time he shuld have kept the piece in hand and thats not what he did i see it same way u doo kingandqueen2017 and he knew it see the video peps

The touch-move rule, as defined by FIDE law 4.7, aims to prevent changes of intent after a piece has been moved. Pragganda initially committed to moving the knight to h4 by physically placing that piece on that square. He then changed it without officially releasing the piece. This contradicts the touch-move rule.

This is not touch move. I do this all the time. I see something as im moving a piece. This is fine

If FIDE's intent was for a move to be completed when a piece touched a square, they would have written that into the rules. They did not.

The rule says "released on a square" not "in effect 'released' on a square."

The purpose of the touch-move rule isn't just about the physical release of the piece, but also the commitment to one's move. Allowing players to reverse their moves would undermine the clarity of said rule.

The spirit of fair play suggests that once one has made a move with a clear intention, such as moving a piece to a particular square, one must be held accountable for that move.

Top Grandmasters are seen as role models by the entire chess community. It is extremely uncommon for top grandmasters to move a piece to a square, consider its consequences, and then move it elsewhere. As Pragganda is of such a high caliber, I expect better from him.

Finally, we must also keep in mind about the integrity of the game. Pragganda's body language in the video says it all. He feverishly glances to the right of the board, which is the direction his opponent had left in. He knew he was doing an indecent act, and he knew that he needed to get away with it.

Pointless comment.

Pragganda's body language says it all. If he were actually free of any guilt, he would not have been glancing around for any potential watchers.

The OP's first post describes a position where touch move was followed. In over four decades as a TD/arbiter I've seen numerous strong players (GMs/IMs/FMs/NMs) that are not fully knowledgeable of the somewhat arcane tournament-related rules and have required explanations. I've gotten used to such strong players needing the explicit rules shown to them before they realize there was no rule violation.

International Arbiter here.
Picking up a piece, putting it on a square without releasing it, returning it to its original square and then making a different move with it may be annoying, and if a player were repeatedly doing that, I might step in and warn them about distraction. But it is not a violation of the touch-move rule.

I wouldn't care. Because it helps me as much as it helps him to visualize the possibility of moving there.

But I didn't see him consistently doing that. I saw him do it once. He may have intended to move there, but apparently, he changed his mind. Which the rules allow. I don't see any dispute or ambiguity. He touched a piece and moved that piece. I really wouldn't care HOW he moved it.

I do this all the time. So im cheating?

No, exactly. And he wasn't even doing anything wrong. Plus its possible he just got distraacted by something else. He's only a teenager