Draw? Really?

This is not correct. The position has to be repeated 3 times, the move order doesn't matter.

Nice

LOL

LOL all you want, that's the rule.

I know thats the rule but... Hard to explain.

It is hard to explain. I think the best way is to just say any position that appears identically 3 times throughout the game.

Tibs was kind of right when he says "or when moves are repeated 3 times". The position has to be repeated 3 times, and the only way to do that is to have the moves repeated 3 times. Not where the pieces move FROM, but where the pieces move TO.

ok

It's best to talk about positions though as it's possible that multiple different pieces moved but individual ones may not have moved to a square more than once.

If all the pieces are on the exact same squares three or more times in a game, with the same side to move each time, and the same possible moves available each time, then a draw by triple repetition of position can be claimed (or is automatic in live games here).

Yes. And the only way to do that is have the pieces that make up that identical position move TO the squares that make up that position.

I think people get confused about the moving part, assuming the same moves have to repeated in succession. It seems to me the only way to have a repetition draw is to have the pieces move TO that position, regardless of where they started from.

This is absolutely not true.

Imagine that you move your knight back-and forth once, then your bishop back-and-forth, and your opponent does the same. In this case, no move was repeated even once, but the position repeated 3 times, and it's a draw.

Is there an arbiter in the chat? Instead of moderators...we get have arbiter moderators! Brilliant!

I guess I'm not understanding that. If the move is not repeated, if a piece is not moved to the squares that make up the position, how does the position get repeated 3 times?

In every position (except the opening position) a piece was moved to a square and that position is then considered a position. A piece has to move TO the square that makes up that position, regardless of where that piece came from.

In your example it seems to me the only way for the position to be repeated 3 times is for the pieces to be moved, or returned, to that position 3 times. Maybe I'm just not wording it correctly. Could you display a diagram that illustrates what you are thinking?

Imagine the starting position.

1. Nc3 Nc6 2. Nb1 Nb6 (position repeated) 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Ng1 and black can claim a draw with the intention of repeating the position the third time with Ng8.

.

STALEMATE

...566.-7uyhh67iku

I guess I'm still not understanding that from your description. No doubt a different move could be made that results in a repeated position (with the correct side to play that results in the identical position). I've never questioned that. What I'm saying is the only way to arrive at the threefold position is for the pieces to move TO the same squares that make up that repeated position. Regardless of where they came from.

I agree some pieces may or may not have been moved 3 times, because that would not necessarily effect the position being repeated 3 times. Maybe that's what you are saying? That the identical moves do not have to be repeated 3 times?

Maybe it's just poor wording, which is why it can be difficult to explain. Which is why I originally said the best description is probably just any position that appears identically 3 times throughout the game.

I have very deliberately given an example where every single move in the entire game is different. How you can say that moves repeated 3 times is completely beyond me. Every single move was different.