In a serious in person tourney situation….what would happen if I did the following:
Moved a piece in what looks like a blunder but as soon as I took my hand off made a “disgusted with myself noise and sighed”.
With my real intention being for him to accept whatever sacrifice I’m making and to execute a trap.
Now I know that a guy like Magnus or another famous GM is going to throughly explore what appears to be a too good to be true….and probably see it. But what is the etiquette in such a situation?
I SUSPECT that whether it worked or not, if I lost or not….said GM would grab my king at the end and at least toss it on the floor and call me “a fucking clown”
Now I asked about a serious setting cause I’d guess in street chess anything goes and online…well I keep chat disabled anyway
Yes, in that level of play it is even not advised to say check or checkmate due to the distraction potential and the only sound one should make is upgraded pawn request.
If you say checkmate correctly the distraction potential is over, like the game. Now if you say checkmate and it is not you look like a complete fool. It’s like in real life: If you aim at the king you better not miss.
To the OP: I bet if you were playing in “a serious in person tourney situation” and you expect to pull a stunt like that successfully, you are in for a nasty surprise. Your opponent may scold you after you give up a couple of moves down the line. No need to do it before.
I’m sure our resident chess master @glee will have some useful thoughts on the matter.
My first thought is that unless you at some point tell your opponent your plan as outlined in the OP, as far as they’re concerned you could have genuinely thought you made a blunder at the time, and only afterwards realised it was actually a good sacrifice. In that case I would say your plan is slightly unethical, but not punishable under the Laws of Chess.
If you admit to the subterfuge, the tournament arbiter may or may not choose to take some sort of action against you under Articles 11 and 12. Personally I would recommend against it.
I think I’ve retold this old story on the board before, but I’ll do so again here as it’s very similar to this situation: in a tournament game, one player indulges in the bad habit of ‘hovering’ his hand over a piece before deciding whether or not to move it. As they are doing so, over their queen in a complicated position, their opponent hisses “You touched that!”. “I did not!” the player replies. The arbiter is called to resolve the dispute, and eventually rules that as it is one word against another, with no other evidence available, the player is entitled to move another piece. He triumphantly does so, and is beaten shortly thereafter - the opponent knew all along that moving the queen was the only way to save the game!
If you make a loud enough noise, then undoubtedly someone (e.g. your opponent or a neighbouring player) will complain to the arbiter and you will be told not to do that again.
Tournament chess is very quiet. Before electronic clocks came in, the only sound was the ticking of the clocks.
I very much doubt this would happen. Chess is not wrestling!
Your opponent might refuse to analyse the game with you afterwards (normally everybody does this because it’s a big help in improving one’s game) and probably quietly tell their friends what you did.
Here are a couple of my experiences in tournament play that are relevant:
I was playing a much-lower rated player who looked nervous. Nevertheless, he was holding his own when he missed a neat combination by me that won a pawn. He audibly swore.
I quietly complained to the arbiter, who took my opponent aside and told him to behave.
The game finished with no further incident.
in my first game against a Grandmaster (we knew each other), I actually said ‘check’ to him.
He looked at me; the game continued and afterwards his first words were “glee - you don’t say check - let alone to a grandmaster!”
in a team match my opponent was deep in though, so I quietly got up and walked around for a bit. Whilst I was away, my opponent touched a pawn - which was a losing blunder.) He looked up (I was not in sight) and caught the gaze of my team-mate. Reluctantly, he made the losing move.
Is “j’adoube” still the accepted term to announce that you’re adjusting the position of a piece that has been accidentally knocked of its square or something, and not intending to move it?
In my college drinking days, the rule was that if you finished your drink while someone was still nursing their pint from the previous round of drinks, you were allowed to say “j’adoube” and take their fresh pint.
I recall during a school tournament – no clocks, even – hearing an excited, “Checkmate! … Checkmate! … Checkmate!” His opponent was moving between the three announcements. The last one stuck.
Yes indeed.
It usually is just to centre a piece on the square.
I believe it’s French for ‘I adjust’.
I would only adjust a piece on my turn (rude to do it when your opponent is thinking) and would also avoid doing it to more than one piece (same reason.)
P.S. Another bit of chess vocabulary is offering a draw. Easy enough if your opponent speaks English, but I’ve found that in Europe that ‘remis?’ is well accepted.
I was playing practice games with a grandmaster at speed chess (5 mins each; no increments) when I checked him. He replied not by getting out of check, but checking me.
I got out of check, he checked me again … and only then did I claim the win.
This thread illustrates the difference between the etiquette of chess and Magic: The Gathering, which is played in very serious tournaments for tens of thousands of dollars, and in which various mind games of this sort are, if not actively encouraged, certainly tolerated and sometimes celebrated.
Then there’s poker, played for the highest monetary stakes of any game (I think?) where any shenanigans of this sort are referred to as “angle shooting”, and are (it’s my impression) looked down on, but not forbidden. The hand isn’t cancelled, someone doesn’t get their money back, if they got angle shot… but my general impression is that someone who has a reputation as an angle shooter might just not be invited to the table.
I think that, in poker, the reason things like this are looked down upon is because, at the pro level, they simply don’t work, but a lot of inexperienced folk think they work, or are even essential to the game, and so someone trying something like that is marking themself a an amateur.
Chess was invented in India. There is a famous book (converted into a movie by the Oscar Winning director Satyajit Ray) called “The Chess Players” Shatranj ke Khiladi - Wikipedia
The story takes place around 1857 when the East India company is at its peak, annexing kingdom after kingdom leading up to the first war of Indian independence.
There are two wealthy Indian Muslim aristocrats who are totally oblivious of the unfolding events around them. They are consumed with playing chess day and night, ignoring their wives (one of the wives is having an affair) and families.
There is a scene in the movie, where are the aristocrats exchange bitter words because “Etiquette dictates that once you touch a piece on the board, you are obliged to move it , and not play another move”
Re: Touching pieces. Im glad that ONLINE there’s no real corresponding rule. It really helps me hold my mouse over the pieces…and a theory just occurred to me. Do players play more ‘accurately’ in online play? Surely they do? We’d have to filter out cheaters somehow. Maybe just use a database of players we absolutely trust. My theory being online, you can talk out loud and move your piece around.
This thread is reminding me of that horrible trope seen in movies and comics: (Said out loud) “Check!”
“Checkmate!”
I was thinking about Bridge (no information leaks or mind games via mannerisms, intonation, timing variations or hesitation, etc. or the tournament director will be all over you) vs. Truco (winking, blinking, wiggling one’s nose…)
