The present implementation in chess.com is:

* make the move,

* start the opponent's clock

* the OFFER DRAW button changes to "CLAIM DRAW"

* and hope that after the opponent's clock has been started, there will be the chance to click on this CLAIM DRAW button before the opponent makes his next move.

Over the board, the order of doing things is:

* say / write down which move you are going to make

* claim the draw by threefold repetition

* do not start your opponent's clock at all.

Maybe two nice possibilities to implement this could be:

A

Let us assume that a player is not playing touch move in his Online games, but using the confirm button.

* When the player makes a move on the board which leads to a threefold repetition, then the "offer draw" button could be made to change to a "claim draw" button after the move has been made on the board, but before the confirm button has been clicked.

* This would allow players to claim a draw by repetition by:

- making the planned move on the board

- clicking on the "claim draw button"

- which ends the game even before the confirm button has to be clicked, so the possibility that the opponent moves quickly, for example by a conditional move, before one has been able to click on the claim draw button, is no longer a possibility.

B

Another possibility to implement this could be (I am talking about Online Chess games throughout):

* no assumption on whether the player is playing touch move or not.

* After a move has been made and confirmed (by moving and clicking confirm for players who do not play "touch move", or by moving on the board for players who have the "touch move" option set so they do not use the confirm button), it is checked whether there is a threefold repetition BEFORE the opponent's clock is started.

* If there is a threefold repetition, a window opens with the question:

"Your move has lead to a threefold repetition of the position. Do you want to claim a draw by threefold repetition?

YES, CLAIM DRAW      /     NO"

* If the player clicks on "YES, CLAIM DRAW" the game is declared drawn by repetition,

* If the player clicks on "NO", the opponent's clock is started and the game goes on. The player's game window will show only the button "OFFER DRAW" now, while the opponent's game window will show the "CLAIM DRAW" button, because he now has the right to claim a draw by repetition because the present position has arisen three times and it is his turn.

(To make sure that the game is not indeterminately put on hold while this additional window is open, one could add a timer in this window and close this window if nothing has been done for, say, 5 minutes. Or one could set the timer for this window to the time which had remained for the move of that player. If the player does not do anything during that time, the answer is assumed to be no and the game goes on.)

The best way to implement this here will of course depend on what is feasible most easily for the programmers. Maybe they will like an option like the following third possibility best?

C

Keep everything as is, except for:

* If a third repetetion has been reached, and the OFFER DRAW button has changed to CLAIM DRAW, make sure that there will be enough time to click on it even if the opponent makes his next move quickly.

* So in these cases, even if the opponent's next move is a conditional move, do not play it out immediately.

* Insert a waiting period of, say, 1 minute or 5 minutes after the button has changed to CLAIM DRAW, in which the player has time to click on this button to claim the draw, and in which period the opponent's time is not yet started (and for example, the move made is not yet transmitted to the opponent), so he cannot make a quick move on the board.

Do the programmers agree that this option C would be the least work to implement, and that this would nicely enough solve the issue?

rooperi, I agree that option B has the drawback that the computer very obviously tells the player when there is a threefold repetition, even if he had not noticed it.

I am sceptical about the idea that a draw offer should automatically be converted into a draw claim as in option D, because offering and claiming a draw are two quite different things.

Would option C, resolving all practical problems with the present implementation, be acceptable for you?

Or would you wish to try to mimic over-the-board behaviour even more closely by introducing something like the following option E ?

E

In the game window, there is always both an OFFER DRAW button and a separate CLAIM DRAW button.

In order to claim a threefold repetition, I would have to:

1) click the CLAIM DRAW button

a) if the threefold repetition has already arisen after my opponent'smove, the game is declared a draw

b) if the threefold repetition is not there on the board, you will see a message

("In order to claim a draw by a threefold repetition arising after your next move, make your next move now")

2) make the move I want to make on the board

3) a) see that the game has been declared a draw

("your move has lead to a threefold repetition and the game has been drawn")

or b) see that the game is going on and see the message

("your move did not lead to a threefold repetition, so the game goes on")

So presently, the programmers seem to be able to choose between two nice options, C and E.

Maybe from a design and usability point of view, it would be nice to keep the number of buttons as small as possible. So I am not sure if the designers think that an entire extra button in the game window could be justified for the mere purpose of claiming repetitions more nicely. Maybe designers and programmers will tend to prefer option C for reasons of simplicity and practicability.

get_lost, such an option F would be contrary to the FIDE rules. A draw by repetition is not rewarded automatically by an arbiter, it has to be noticed and claimed by a player.

That would allow the player to use 100% computer help to detect threefold repetitions. Option F is not without these problems.

I would like to point out that in blitz and bullet ( and even rapid chess ) no score is kept so it would be practically impossible to prove there has actually been a repetition of position . Ofcourse I am speaking of otb chess. In online chess the computer can keep track of these things. There are several differences that dont seem quite fair to me but ofcourse I started playing tournament chess almost 40 years ago. I have never thought it quite fair that the computer will claim the win for a player if their opponent runs out of time. In otb chess you must notice your opponent has run out of time and claim the win . If an arbiter is watching your game though and either player flags the arbiter will call the game. I dont know about uscf TDs but FIDE arbiters will/do IF they are watching the game......