# Chess question **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [August 6, 2007, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chess-question/414635 "2007-08-06T16:11:12Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![BarnOwl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e95f7d/32.png) [@BarnOwl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BarnOwl)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2007, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chess-question/414635/1 "2007-08-06T16:11:12Z")
There’s a book called “The Quickest Chess Victories of All Time,” for sale at… > **[Quickest Chess Victories of All Time: Burgess, Graham: 9781857445381:...](https://www.amazon.com/Quickest-Chess-Victories-All-Time/dp/1857445384)** > > Quickest Chess Victories of All Time \[Burgess, Graham\] on Amazon.com. \*FREE\* shipping on qualifying offers. Quickest Chess Victories of All Time …and a customer reviewer with the name of **I am the man from Silicon Valley with the review below.** , mentions that years ago, the penalty for an illegal move was a King move. So, say you make an illegal move, your opponent calls the Director and he agrees the move is illegal. But, your King cannot move because the opponent has all the available King squares covered. Would you get a tie from this debacle? I certainly hope not. I think you should not only suffer a loss, but made to go to bed without your supper. ---
**Author:** ![Gangster\_Octopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a8b319/32.png) [@Gangster\_Octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gangster_Octopus)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2007, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chess-question/414635/2 "2007-08-06T16:46:12Z")
I don’t really think it is true that the penalty for an illegal move was a forced King move at any time. No cite, but I have never heard that as the case either and it doesn’t really make a lot of sense, IMO. ---
**Author:** ![garygnu](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/garygnu/32/2924_2.png) [@garygnu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/garygnu)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2007, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chess-question/414635/3 "2007-08-06T16:50:58Z")
[QUOTE=BarnOwl] …a customer reviewer… [snip] …mentions that years ago, the penalty for an illegal move was a King move. So, say you make an illegal move, your opponent calls the Director and he agrees the move is illegal. But, your King cannot move because the opponent has all the available King squares covered. Would you get a tie from this debacle? I certainly hope not… [/QUOTE] I’ve never heard of this, but I’m not an expert. Paging **glee** … Anyway, if this was actually a rule, your point is probably the reason it was dropped. ---
**Author:** ![Julius\_Henry](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/8797f3/32.png) [@Julius\_Henry](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Julius_Henry)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2007, 11:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chess-question/414635/4 "2007-08-06T23:50:58Z")
If my memory of old books of chess stories is correct, when the King did not have a legal move, then there was no penalty. ---
**Author:** ![BarnOwl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e95f7d/32.png) [@BarnOwl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BarnOwl)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2007, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chess-question/414635/5 "2007-08-07T00:14:04Z")
Well, I bought the book. It won’t make me a better player, but it looks like fun - and I don’t have to contend with that asinine old rule. ---
**Author:** ![Chessic\_Sense](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/7c8e57/32.png) [@Chessic\_Sense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chessic_Sense)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2007, 1:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chess-question/414635/6 "2007-08-07T01:04:31Z")
For the record, nowadays, the opponent gets two minutes onto his clock. It’s really meaningful if you’re both racing w/ 30 seconds left, which is when illegal moves are likely to occur. ---
**Author:** ![Henrichek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/5daacb/32.png) [@Henrichek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Henrichek)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2007, 5:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chess-question/414635/7 "2007-08-07T05:11:29Z")
Hmm. I didn’t know it was even allowed to make illegal moves. Couldn’t that unbalance the game quite a lot in some situations? Why accept such moves at all? ---
**Author:** ![SCSimmons](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e495f1/32.png) [@SCSimmons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SCSimmons)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2007, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chess-question/414635/8 "2007-08-08T17:52:26Z")
[QUOTE=Henrichek] Hmm. I didn’t know it was even allowed to make illegal moves. Couldn’t that unbalance the game quite a lot in some situations? Why accept such moves at all? [/QUOTE] Well, no, it’s not allowed. When a player makes a move that’s determined to be illegal, the move is retracted, and all pieces involved returned to their previous locations. The penalty is applied for the attempt … That’s the nature of the penalty under discussion, that the replacement for the retracted move must be a King move (if any legal King move is available, evidently). I’ve never heard of that one either …