Threefold Repetition. Genesis Of An Idea!? A Great Game With A Story.

So, threefold repetition. These days a rule that is generally used to get a quick effortless draw without a fight. However, there are reasons that the rule came about.

The history of the rules of chess are not exactly my strong point, but I do know that the idea of a draw by repetition evolved over a long period in the 19th Century. There was a six-fold repetition rule in both the Paris - Pest correspondence match in the 1840's, and in the Steinitz - Zukertort match in 1886. The rule was certainly still evolving at the time of the Hastings 1895 tournament. ( My old friend Ritson always chuckled at Blackburne's take on it in that event.)

When top level tournaments and matches first started to happen with any regularity, they were normally played under the rules given in either Staunton's handbook, or Bilguer's Handbuch ( stemming from von der Lasa), neither of which had rules regarding repetitions. As playing to strict time controls became normal, the need for such a rule became clear, with the game here being an important one in that regard.

O.K. That's the preamble out of the way!

Last week I was browsing through the last quarter of Tim Harding's recent - excellent - book.

and reached the game of Steinitz that I have probably spent the most time with. It was one of the first games of his that I studied seriously, in a very nice - if now outdated - book by Max Euwe, that I still have.

Comparatively recently - whilst researching Cecil De Vere - I came across the full version of the game, and the story bound up with it, in Schachzeitung of 1871. ( It is actually the first game in that volume.) So, here's the original source stuff.

The game has the editorial comment - by Minkwitz, I think,
'At the special request of Mr. Neumann, we print this memorable game without the slightest change, and avoiding any abbreviation, with the appropriate explanations in full.'
So, let's go look at the game! The notes I will give ( other than those credited) are those from Max Euwe's book, and- although there are a number of analytical errors- I learned a lot from them way back when, and I think anyone who takes the time to read them will learn a lot too. ( If you don't you are a bloody good player!!) Euwe was a teacher in his other life, and it shows in his writings. I will also include my own - edited and non-literal - translation of the long note from Schachzeitung at move 19.

Apart from the side-story, it is a fascinating game - I love it. My kind of chess studying.

I am fascinated by the evolution of chess thinking - here we see Steinitz as a student of Paulsen, and a teacher of the likes of Tarrasch.

I love my chess battles! In this game we see Steinitz

battling it out with his main rival for the position of number one in the World ( although Anderssen won the tournament!!) He was a fighter through and through - having outplayed his great opponent and achieved a crushing position, he botches things badly, but still keeps trying to win, despite having to take some risks that he could have paid the full price for. From a lost position Neumann

keeps fighting too, and at one point could even have won, before collapsing from exhaustion.

And I love endgames. There is a lot to be learned from this one.

Enough already - best post the game, eh! Please take the time to go through it properly and read the notes - as I say, you will learn some stuff! It will take you some time. However, although in the modern world there is 'instant knowledge', technology has not yet given us 'instant learning and understanding'!

Researching all this I finally got round to this wonderful book

There Hans Renette points out something that I had not seen before. ( Always learning)  It is in the same Schachzeitung 1871 volume - page 151- and is the earliest reference I know of ( as I say, not my field) of the game being drawn by threefold repetition.

I will take the liberty of reproducing Renette's translation - time is short here!

''Dear Mr. Minkwitz!

In consequence of the eternal game played by Mr. Steinitz against me in the Baden tournament, a few remarks may be permitted.

I am Particularly anxious that the monstrous duration of match and tournament games can be limited in any way. Four, at most six hours, are more than sufficient. That is already a serious test of patience.

But who, like me, played games of eight, ten, or twelve hours in one sitting, will know that chess stops being a game, being a labour, because it becomes a torture.

I have repeatedly intendended not to play in any serious chess competition when the thinking time, and the probable duration of the game, that should always be played out at one sitting, has not been determined. But as one can disproportionately prolong the duration of the game when a fixed time limit is used, see for example the game mentioned above, I propose to avoid such a scenario ( which repeatedly took place in the Baden Tournament) by giving each player the right to terminate the game as undecided after a threefold repetition.

I believe that chess friends will agree with me.

But if anyone is of another opinion, then I wish him to contest a game lasting eight hours on one day against Mr. Rosenthal. When he is not converted, then he may play a game of ten hours against Mr. Paulsen. If he survives this test of patience without complaining, than I wish to see him forced to sit across the board from Mr. Steinitz for twelve hours.

Certainly he will humbly ask for pardon that he rebelled with theoretical argumants against my, in this respect, mature experience.''

Quoted with thanks and respect to Hans Renette, with the promise that as soon as my new scanner arrives, I will repay the many kindnesses!!

Thanks for joining me everyone. Feel free to make any - polite - comments. Hopefully you will have learned something - both chess wise and from the historical element - for free!! ( must start charging for lessons!! ( cynicism intended!!)

To close, a nice picture of Steinitz that I came across online recently via www.chessbookchat  from A.C.M vol.1. It includes the only image of the strong Philidelphia player Robinson that I can think of, and a rare one of Napier. Pretty cool!!

Take care. Simaginfan.