click for larger view

The lad is thinking 19...Qxc3 20.Qxc3 Ne2+ but 20.Qxc3 is a check!

He possibly means he would have made that mistake during the game.

Of course if the game had been played in 1835 and White did not announce an attack to the Black King by saying "Check!" then Black could have ignored it and played Ne2+ and Nxc3.

This, 'you must announce a check' rule was in 'Chess for Beginners' by William Lewis 1835.

https://image.ibb.co/bH4HSQ/check.jpg>

If the 2016 World Championship play off had been played in 1835 and here...

click for larger view

....Carlsen has just played 50.Qh6 and if Carlsen never said 'check' then Karjakin could play 50...Qf1 and announce 'checkmate'.

Other 1835 'rules'.

If you make an illegal move then your opponent has the choice of letting you keep it, make another move with the touched piece or force the player to make a King move.

Here

click for larger view

White plays 3.Nb3 Black declares it illegal, puts the Knight back on b1 and forces a King move from White. 3.Ke2 Qe4 mate.

----

If a pawn reached the 8th rank then it can be replaced with 'any' piece of the players choosing.

This wording allows you to take another King or even promote to an opponents piece.

White to play and mate in 3 (1835) - two solutions involving a Bishop promotion.

click for larger view

1. h8 = Bishop and mate in two.

You can't count on people clicking links. There are too many to click. The relevant information has to go in the post itself.

But okay, assuming this is correct, are there any games extant in any database showing this rule in operation? (Would the databases even be able to handle them?)

That's a riot! Now I know what you do in your spare time!

The thing is that that's no penalty at all UNLESS the other player can mate on the move.

<He reads chess books. What a shock. I assumed he was into gardening.>

Okay, but how many people read chess books about games and positions that are no longer possible according to the modern rules?

Quite a lot of people. It's a well known story, that's been told by every writer of chess curiosities from Soltis to Chernev. It's not that I misunderstood the point, but that the point was wrong.

<Quite a lot of people. It's a well known story, that's been told by every writer of chess curiosities from Soltis to Chernev. It's not that I misunderstood the point, but that the point was wrong.>

And just what percentage of people would you say fall into the category? Probably no more than one in a million. It was a new story for me and I enjoyed it, so sue me. Sally Simpson was just telling an amusing anecdote and you have to "contradict" him with some pedantic hair-splitting arguments that are completely beside the point because you can't even bother to click on a link takes all of 10 seconds to read. Then when you miss the point because you're too lazy to click on the link, you have the chutzpah to blame HIM for it! By the way, your "point" about having to include everything in the post instead of providing a link is too silly to comment on, but especially in that case, because it was in graphic format and couldn't be pasted into the post.

4.B x King on e8 highlights how stupid the rule was and it was soon abolished, if indeed it was ever taken seriously. The rules at that time were a miss-mash differing from country to country, region to region, town to town, club to club.

Staunton laid down 90% of the bones of the rules we use today in the 1850's. FIDE and other at the time governing bodies have been tweaking them ever since.

"....are there any games extant in any database showing this rule in operation? "

Of course no PGN reader would accept leaving a King in check or the taking of a King though countless OTB blitz game have been lost this way. (there probably a few unexplained resignations in Blitz games on this site where a King was left in check.)

Here is a game forcing a King move resulting in a mate in 3.

Lindemann vs Echtermeyer, 1893

I was not telling a story, I was using facts from a book for beginners written in 1835 which I recently happened to be going through looking for something completely different.

There are a few games with illegal moves in them, and I'm not sure how PGN Readers handle them. But I have seen a few engines recently with a check box for whether or not to enforce legal moves, so maybe that's the way they're going.

They're probably going to have to do that because recent rule changes have ensured that there will be more illegal moves in games. You may recall, the old rule was that when an illegal move was discovered while the game was in progress, the position would go back to the point where the illegal move was made. But that was probably impractical, holding up a tournament just because of one game, so a few years back, the rule was changed to where you had to notice the illegal move within 3 moves.

"If a king can be taken, then Carlsen could have taken black's king after Qf1."

The whole set of rules is a farce.

Following Lewis's rules in the example given if Carlsen never said 'check' then Karjakin (in 1835) could have played Qf1 announcing 'checkmate' which ends the game. Carlsen cannot take the Black King, the game is over.

Remember, before someone happens along and does not read the whole thread, not my rules, Lewis's rules for Beginners from 1835. Not guidelines, actual rules of the game.

Of course all kinds of rows would have broken out (and probably did) till this rule and the others mentioned were tidied up. Lewis should have been more careful how he worded the rules. (you guys were not around then to correct him!)

One can just imagine the blazing arguments taking place up and down the country. One player clutching Lewis's book.

"You never said 'check' so I am not in check!"

And situations like this are possible. White has just played Ba4 but not announced check.

click for larger view

So Black ignores the unquoted check and play Rc8 White now plays Rh8 which is checkmate. If he does not announce the checkmate then Black can, according to Lewis, play Rc1 and as long as he said 'check' and despite the fact the Black King is in double check White would have to play Bd1.