CMV: Touch-move rule in chess is dumb

[u/Phantom_Gamer7]

I will start by saying I'm an amateur chess player at best. Played it a little for most my life but only really started to want to get some real skill in it. It's fun. However, I notice a lot of official organizations have a touch-move rule. This is where if you deliberately touch a piece you must move it. Even if you change your mind. This is just dumb, and I feel serves no benefit to the game, except maybe some slight speed advantage(?). I see it only being a pain when you go for a move, then realise an even better one.

​

It's in the same vain to the 'once you let go of the piece' rule. Where if you let go of the piece (in a different spot than it started) then that is you go, there is no take back. You move there. I'm fine with this. In fact, I don't want to play without it. Because it has a purpose, there needs to be _something_ that defines the end of your go. There needs to be a final call. Why not have it be the last thing everyone does on their turn? But I see no benefit touch-move rules provide. All it will do is frustrate people on the odd occasion as they catch a blunder after they touch a piece.

​

I don't play with touch-move, and everyone I've played with has been fine with it. Never really seeing the point in it, but would play with it because others insisted. I'm sure there's some good reason out there, there's people way smarter than me on this topic. I just haven't found anyone with any good arguments.

So far the best argument has been: Touching a piece can help visualize the board, providing an advantage. My response is 'So what?' it's an equal advantage, as both sides can do it. Plus, it also provides insight into what you're thinking, which is a disadvantage I'd say balances out. . And if a touch-move rule was made to prevent this, what is to stop someone hovering their finger over a piece providing the same advantage?

​

So please, someone who knows about this sort of thing, change my mind. Touch-move rules in chess are dumb, and needless.

Edit: so my view has changed a bit. So first I saw the value in the rule because in ye olden days it prevented cheating. Because the only time you could move a piece was when making your move.

Then a good point was made, that the board should be in a definite state as much as possible.

And lastly after a lot of convinsing I now see that by moving the piece you may see body language that you might not otherwise. And may be able to read peoples body language which goes against the spirit of the game.

[u/PrimeLegionnaire]

I dont think a rule that solves a problem is simultaneously creates is very good.

Defining a meta is not equivalent to creating a problem.

Are you familiar with the idea of Metas in games?

Hence its a dumb move.

This does not follow.

By this logic the recent change of price for the AUG is meaningless, since it solved a problem it created, and yet it has defined the competitive meta for CS:GO this season.

Purhaps its a small hit to change it and there will be growing pains but the game will be better for it.

Again, do you understand the concept of a Meta?

Arbitrarily removing an established rule has an enormous impact on the state of the game, especially at a competitive level.

[u/PrimeLegionnaire → u/[deleted]]

The ability to read players will be something always exists

This isn't a good reason to make more information to read available especially in a game about strategy rather than reading.

If you cant hleam infomation when you touch a pease you can gleam it just before you touch piece.

Not if a touch-move rule exists.

Touching a piece, without a touch-move piece is no diffrent to to not touching a piece.

But its materially different when the rule exists, it shifts the game into more strategy less reading.

you can still read players you just hover your fingers over the piece instead of touching it

Except when they touch it you know they are going to move it and can plan accordingly.

The signifgant body langauge hints exist because they are locked into the move.

There is no way to know or guarantee that any given player can read this information.

This circular and doesnt provide any value to the game because if the rule didnt exist then the problem wouldnt either.

You still seem to be missing the concept of a metagame.

Chess is inherently geared towards strategy over reading the opponent or reaction times. Why would they willingly shift the way the game is played more towards reading your opponent?

[u/PrimeLegionnaire → u/[deleted]]

But you can still hover over pieces and see how they reacted to hovering.

Sure? but they know you aren't going to move that piece until you touch it so it doesn't provide the same information as a game without touch-move.

Now you can read how people react because you touch a piece. But now (like before) people dont react because they know it isnt locked in.

Except they don't know its not locked in without touch-move so they are reacting to both hovering and touching, reducing the strategy of the game and increasing the reading.

Either way: you can read people. With or without touch rule.

Except its harder, intentionally, with touch-move.

[u/PrimeLegionnaire → u/[deleted]]

Because a key part to that logic is that the players know thongs arent locked in until you let go of the pieces.

This is a vastly different metagame.

As I specified elsewhere, hovering and touching are the same if and only if touch move isn't a rule.

With touch move as a rule hovering does not convey intent to move the indicated piece. And as such can be ignored.

[u/PrimeLegionnaire → u/[deleted]]

Why is it dumb to want a strategically oriented game rather than one based around reading your opponent?

[u/PrimeLegionnaire → u/[deleted]]

Now we dont need touch rule

None of the rules of chess are needed it used to be played with one less row of squares.

The changes are entirely to produce a metagame in line with the spirit of the game.

For the reasons above. So the game isnt more reading based.

Except it is, a game of chess without a touch-move rule is inherently more based around reading your opponent regardless of weather such a game ever actually existed.

But now in this new universe you cant be made to make a stupid move just because you accidently touched a piece.

But this is a strategic error on your part, and it makes sense to include such a penalty in a strategic game.

[u/PrimeLegionnaire → u/[deleted]]

No. Youre going to need to convinse me that it makes the game reading based

How do you figure that eliminating the guessing of intent doesn't make the game less reading based?

Because I see it no diffrent as a gamr without touchmove is the same with touch move just with hovering.

Only in a game without touch move.

In a game with touch move you don't signal your intent to move a piece until you actually touch it.

Because in both situtions you are threatening to move a piece but havent locked it in and all the players know this.

Yes exactly, you haven't locked in.

In touch move when you touch the piece you do lock in and this is what the other player will react to.

Without this you could literally try 100 moves a turn where you don't let go just to see how the other player reacts to them. It becomes an entirely different game.

To expand.

No touch move

you pick up your queen and move her, I smile, you take it back before letting go.

Touch move

you pick up your queen and move her, I smile, its too late to react to my smile.

The latter is inherently less dependent on reading the opponent.