From: Pieter Stouten <stouten <at> SHOGI <dot> NET>
Date: 11 apr 2000
Subject: Illegal moves

This issue has been subject of much debate for as long as I play
Shogi. Over time the following picture has emerged (which was
confirmed by Mr. Onogi of NSR in communications to, among others,
Peter Blommers, president of the Dutch Shogi Association):

The first event that finalizes the game decides the outcome, but it
has to be detected and reported by one of the players (not by an
arbiter or spectator, who at no time are allowed to comment in any
way on a game in progress). This means that if a player detects and
reports an illegal move on the board, or that the flag has fallen or
that one of the players has been mated or if a player resigns,
whatever happens first decides the outcome.

If a nifu was played and subsequently removed, the game cannot be
claimed after the nifu has gone (whether the game is being recorded
or not). A nice example of this was played by Ian Spence eons ago. He
dropped a nifu and on the next move captured his own offending pawn.
Neither player noticed, but the audience had the time of their life.

Last year at the MSO, an apparently defective byoyomi clock (although
later tests did not support that notion) had failed to beep and
player A lost on time. I was arbiter and player B reported this fact
to me. Afterwards, both players concluded that the clock must indeed
have failed to beep, and player B generously resigned as he had an
inferior position when player A lost on time. However, the initial
result (player A losing on time) had been communicated to me and
although both players wanted to reverse the result, I had no choice
but to let the initial result stand, as the prime responsibility of
any arbiter is to apply the rules rigorously.

Also last year at the MSO, I made a mistake myself as arbiter: when
exchanging pieces, one must capture the opponent's piece and then put
one's own piece on the square where the captured piece was (this is
just a description of capture; nothing new here). However, some
players (when capturing the opponent's bishop with their own bishop)
have the habit of taking their own bishop (rather than their
opponent's) off the board and adding it to their pieces in hand,
followed immediately by turning their opponent's bishop around and
putting it back as their own. Although the end result is the same (a
bishop capturing a bishop), the procedure is not legal as I found out
a while after that (sorry, Terje, you were right!).

Maybe the time is ripe for formalizing rules governing the issues
Doug raised (draws, illegal moves, etc.).

Ciao,

Pieter