From: Larry Kaufman WIZARD NET> Date: 12 apr 2000 Subject: Re: Various shogi rules At 05:03 AM 4/12/00 -0400, you wrote: >Dear shogi friends, >Sorry to be jumping in so late into this discussion. Among other things, I've been busy with finding and retyping the shogi rules for the upcoming Shogi World Championship! ;-) . The rules listed below are basically the current version of the USSF Tournament rules and are based on the Japanese Amateur Ryu-O tournament rules. They are still in the process of being submitted and officially approved, for use in the New York tournament, by the SWC tournament committee. I hope they are useful to this discussion on tournament rules. > >As for the various mishaps that have occurred recently in the Midwest and DC events, it seems that everything was handled properly by the tournament directors. Congratulations on a job well done! > >In Larry's case, the key issue is that the a win was NOT *claimed* by Mr. Yoshinari (even after it was wrongfully pointed out by a spectator) and he is NOT compelled to make the claim. Mr. Yoshinari was not involved in this incident, but both the 4 dan player and the spectator were Japanese. I am almost certain that the player did not deliberately fail to claim the nifu; he seemed quite surprised when it was pointed out. Also, the interval was too long for it to be merely a case of giving his opponent a chance to see it himself. Additionally, the tournament director CANNOT make the claim or declare a win for him. Likewise, tournament directors cannot go around pushing clocks or claiming time forfeits. Fair enough, but my question was how I should have ruled if the player had claimed a win on the basis of information supplied by a spectator. >In the other cases, again, wins were NOT claimed *prior* to the end of the game, or in situations where they could be demonstrated. >Actually, "General Rule #8" below, is a bit unclear in that it does not specifically state that the illegal move must *currently* be visible on the board in order to be claimed. By this I mean, that if a player can replay the game back to the point where the illegal move was made for the referee and his opponent (if necessary), it should also suffice, and be considered a valid claim for a win. Replay by memory or with a score sheet? The former case would just lead to potential arguments. Now, this is a tricky point, and not an option that I'm the least bit eager to introduce into tournament games. > It does seem more practical to require illegal moves to be visible on the board. However, there is one important exception: if a player moves a piece incorrectly (for example, a bishop changing diagonals, as a famous but very elderly 6 dan did against me last year in a friendly game, or mistaking a promoted bishop for a promoted rook, as I once did in a rated game, losing immediately) the illegality will not be visible on the board. >Draws can not be offered or accepted in shogi. Each player must keep moving or lose on time until mate, resignation, or a legitimate drawn position is reached (whereupon the game will be replayed after reversing colors). > >The "cool" Bishop (or occasionally Knight) exchange move *IS* illegal but the warning concept (on the first objectionable occurrence), that Mr. Hollanders talks about, seems very reasonable and will be adopted by the USSF. I have found that most players don't mind to use or have this maneuver used on them occasionally, so long as it is done on the original Bishop's diagonal and preferably early on in the game. My sensei taught me that this was improper. However it is so common that to do more than warn the player would risk a major uproar and cause much hard feeling. > >In the case of "check" the player giving check does lose if he gives check 4 consecutive times. I believe the rule requires four repetitions of the sequence, which would mean at least eight checks. However, I've never heard of the attacker losing when check is not a part of the repeated sequence. That's the whole point of sennichite; repetition of a sequence of moves, without check, in situations where any different move by either player will result in a greatly inferior game for that player. There are possible repetitions where every second move by one player is a check, but not every move. It is my understanding that these cases are not considered perpetual check, but normal sennichite. >George I. Fernandez >USSF Rules Committee Chairman > >------------------------------------------- > >Tournament Rules > >General Rules: >1. All games are Hirate [Even/ no handicap]. >2. Furigoma [traditional toss of pieces] decides the first move. >3. Clocks will be started at the scheduled time. If a player is late, time will be deducted. This is ambiguous. Are you proposing an additional penalty, besides the time elapsed? If not, the second sentence should be left out. >4. A player must push the clock with the same hand that moves the pieces. >5. Gote [White/ the second player] chooses on which side of the board to place the clock. >6. A player must push his/her own clock. >7. A player who runs out of time loses the game. >8. An illegal move, if found in time loses the game. This means while the player claiming the win still has time on his clock and before the end of the game. >9. If an official scorekeeper is used and the game record remains, a win [by the opponent's illegal move] can be claimed at ANY point prior to the start of the following game. This contradicts rule 7. If you really want this rule 9, rule 7 needs to say "except as noted in rule 9". I much prefer the European formulation that whatever happens first (time forfeit, mate, illegal move claim, or resignation) decides the game. >10. If there is a problem or dispute, stop the clock [using the "stop" button (second from right on the blue clocks), not the red "reset" button] and call the referee. The referee will render a decision. > >Sennichite (Draw by repetition) >The game is replayed with the following conditions: >1. The players change sides. That is, sente now becomes gote. >2. The time leftover is the new time allowed for the second game. >3. If less than 10 minutes remain on the clock, the referee will decide how much time to allow for the second game. > Ambiguous; 10 minutes for one player, or for both? Also, the rule should specify whether the player with more time is allowed to keep the extra time. >Jishogi (Draw by Impasse) >This applies ONLY to cases where Kings and all pieces are completely safe, and mating the opponent or winning ANY piece(s) is no longer possible. >· The game is NOT a draw. Tie-breaking rules will be used in tournament play. >· The game is WON by GOTE (White) if he has 27 or more points (see below). >· The game is WON by SENTE (Black) if he has 28 or more points (see below). > >Nyugyoku (Entering King). How to give notice. >A player (referred to as "the player" below) may elect to give "notice of a win by Entering King" to the referee, instead of making a move; He must do this before his time expires. >The referee will grant the player a victory provided that ALL of the conditions listed below are met (if even ONE of these conditions is not met, the player claiming the win will LOSE the game). >1. The player's King is inside the promotion zone (last three ranks). >2. A) If the player is SENTE (Black), he wins if he has 28 or more points. >B) If the player is GOTE (White), he wins if he has 27 or more points. >Count: Rooks and Bishops are 5 points; all other pieces, except the Kings, are 1 point. Count only pieces in hand [Mochigoma], and pieces already inside the promotion zone. >3. The player must have at least 10 pieces [not points], in addition to the King, inside the promotion zone. >4. The King cannot be in check (oute). >5. The player has time remaining after notifying the referee. > >--------------------------------------- > >George I. Fernandez >President >United States Shogi Federation There is no mention about what happens if spectators point out illegal move, checkmate, or time forfeit. These should be addressed in the rules. Of course we can warn the offender not to do it again, but that does not tell us whether a claim is still valid. My vote would be that checkmate, time forfeit, or illegal move just played all still count, but an illegal move that was not claimed before being replied to should stand if pointed out by a spectator, since the player did have a chance to claim it but didn't see it. Larry Kaufman