Now, Black made a bad move in this endgame, but you get the point, the original position is NOT the same as after MOVE 3.
How many times can the same position repeat?
Sort:
May 18, 2018
0
#43
ChessBracketsMoves wrote:
This is a trick question. If neither player calls the arbiter they can continue playing. This is like one of those God doesn't believe in us koans.
Now that I understand the question, I think of it as an academic exercise: How many times can you have the same physical position before it meets the definition of "three-fold" repetition?
It reminds me of a question I have had for a long time: Unless a position is repeated three consecutive times, how many players would recognize a three-fold repetition, especially if there are several moves between repetitions?
May 18, 2018
0
#44
EndgameStudier wrote:
ThrillerFan wrote:
EndgameStudier wrote:
But whose turn it is to move affects whether the position is the same or not.
And that is why the same position, as in layout of the pieces, can occur up to as many as 21 times with no 3 fold repetition. Once it has occurred the 22nd time, 3 fold repetition must have occurred somewhere, whether it be on the 22nd occurrence or earlier. 3 fold must have occurred at some point in the sequence if the same position occurred 22 times. At minimum 3 of those 22 will have occurred with the same player to move and both players having the same legal options. Up to as many as 21 times, it is PPSSIBLE that no 3 fold repetition has occurred, like the example I gave earlier. 21 occurrences and no 3 fold in that example!
You were just referring to castling and en passant though. What about this?
Try going through and figuring it out for yourself. I already accounted for it! Notice that the first occurrence is the only one where en passant is possible. The next two feature castling rights for both WITH WHITE TO MOVE - THEN I TRIANGULATE (or waste a move with a Bishop, even though it's not in the shape of a triangle, it's losing a tempo, which is the point) AND IT IS THE SAME POSITION 2 MORE TIMES WITH BLACK TO MOVE! THAT MAKES FIVE! THEN BLACK LOSES HIS CASTLING RIGHTS ON THE KINGSIDE AND THE NEXT 2 OCCURRENCES ARE WITH BLACK TO MOVE AND THEN BLACK TRIANGULATES AND OCCURRENCES 8 AND 9 ARE WITH WHITE TO MOVE!
Quit questioning what is ALREADY ACCOUNTED FOR!
I think the players would agree to a draw in that case: 3 fold repetition doesn't guarantee a draw in useless play anyway:
This game could go on for THOUSANDS of moves before a position is repeated at ALL, let alone 3.
"Quit questioning what is ALREADY ACCOUNTED FOR!"
I didn't know, my bad.
Mateable material and 50 -move rule could kick in.
May 18, 2018
0
#49
EndgameStudier wrote:
"Quit questioning what is ALREADY ACCOUNTED FOR!"
I didn't know, my bad.
More accurate than you not knowing is you being too lazy to go through the position and answer your own question!
Laziness is what it's called!
May 18, 2018
0
#50
ThrillerFan wrote:
SmyslovFan wrote:
@ Thrillerfan, if a position allows en passant the first time but not the second, they are two different positions!
The rules of chess are clear on this. Same wth bcastling rights.
SmyslovFan, you are telling me what I already know and what I illustrated to answer the OP's question.
He was asking what the maximum number of times it could possibly take of repeating the same position before 3-fold occurs.
I showed that you can repeat the position 21 times with no 3-fold. That was the whole point of that post. The first had en-passant as a legal option, the next 4 had all 4 castling options available (twince each with White and with Black to move), the next 4 had no Black Kingside castling, the next 4 had no White kingside castling, the next 4 had no Black Queenside Castling, the next 4 had nobody able to castle, and after that point, which we are now at 21 occurrences, it is physically impossible to create a 22nd occurrence without 3-folding somewhere! It might be the no castling ability scenario with White to move or it may be the no castling ability scenario with Black to move. Doesn't matter, the 22nd occurrence of the position will GUARANTEE that 3-fold has happened somewhere!
I will try one last time:
Calling it the same position when it's not the same position is not chess!
If you have different options each time, it's not the same position. PERIOD.
ThrillerFan wrote:
EndgameStudier wrote:
"Quit questioning what is ALREADY ACCOUNTED FOR!"
I didn't know, my bad.
More accurate than you not knowing is you being too lazy to go through the position and answer your own question!
Laziness is what it's called!
What about ROOK moves, that only lose castling rights on ONE side? Did you account for that?
May 18, 2018
0
#52
SmyslovFan wrote:
I will try one last time:
Calling it the same position when it's not the same position is not chess!
If you have different options each time, it's not the same position. PERIOD.
What's the point of this post?
May 18, 2018
0
#53
fissionfowl wrote:
"...What's the point of this post?"
I think that it is an academic exercise to show that a position can occur several times before it is a three-fold repetition. For example, in the following, the starting position occurs five times without a repeat because the castling situation has changed. Looks like it will take a total of 20 moves for three-fold repetition unless there is a way to lose a tempo and have Black move first.
May 18, 2018
0
#54
There exists people in positions of shadow power that control the cultural narrative of nations by censoring information that their 'politically correct' mainstream media outlets deem offensive. Free speech and the right to self defense are enemies of tyranny. Censorship is the mindset of weak fascists who hate truth. Resist! Be a free thinking INDIVIDUAL!
May 18, 2018
0
#55
I think that I found a flaw in your logic. You double counted the castling maneuver. If it's possible to switch which side moves first, you cannot include the castling maneuver in the second calculation.. Neither side is able to castle when the switch occurs.
May 19, 2018
0
#56
woton wrote:
fissionfowl wrote:
"...What's the point of this post?"
I think that it is an academic exercise to show that a position can occur several times before it is a three-fold repetition. For example, in the following, the starting position occurs five times without a repeat because the castling situation has changed. Looks like it will take a total of 20 moves for three-fold repetition unless there is a way to lose a tempo and have Black move first.
I was refering to Smyslovfan's post.
This hurts my brain
May 19, 2018
0
#58
I misinterpreted your comment.
There's a problem with the OP using the word repeat in a chess thread. Visually, the position is repeated, but, from a rules-of-chess perspective, it is not repeated. I find it intriguing that it's possible to see the same position several times without its being repeated three times. It goes back to my earlier question about how many players can spot a three-fold repetition unless it happens consecutively.
May 19, 2018
0
#59
woton wrote:
I misinterpreted your comment.
There's a problem with the OP using the word repeat in a chess thread. Visually, the position is repeated, but, from a rules-of-chess perspective, it is not repeated. I find it intriguing that it's possible to see the same position several times without its being repeated three times. It goes back to my earlier question about how many players can spot a three-fold repetition unless it happens consecutively.
Seems to me only a pedantic problem that misses the point.
But whose turn it is to move affects whether the position is the same or not.
And that is why the same position, as in layout of the pieces, can occur up to as many as 21 times with no 3 fold repetition. Once it has occurred the 22nd time, 3 fold repetition must have occurred somewhere, whether it be on the 22nd occurrence or earlier. 3 fold must have occurred at some point in the sequence if the same position occurred 22 times. At minimum 3 of those 22 will have occurred with the same player to move and both players having the same legal options. Up to as many as 21 times, it is PPSSIBLE that no 3 fold repetition has occurred, like the example I gave earlier. 21 occurrences and no 3 fold in that example!
You were just referring to castling and en passant though. What about this?