Producing a draw

Ruben,

Play the game, not the opponent - a golden rule.

Dare I add my 2 cents.

 I think Reuben that you have learned a very valuable lesson and isn't that what life is really about.  Living and learning.  You are now armed with more knowledge than you had before you played the game.  Any chess player worth his/her salt would have played in the same manner.  It is not Otan's fault that you didn't know the rules of the game in which you were playing.  Is it normal for the ememy to provide you with the answers to his tactics - I think NOT - it is up to you to discover those tactics.

 I have played both of you and you are both good chess players.  I think you are doing yourself a disservice by not playing Otan.  He could possibly teach you some things even in defeats and draws.

Now let's get ready to RUMBLE !!!!!!!!!

Put out the challege and play the game !!!!!

Well put sbodd! Be I pardoned to just add the little following point: chess.com is about learning and sharing; that is at least what the site itself declares, right? If it was a tournament, a real competition of some sort, otan would be perfectly right. But when it comes to learning and sharing, then, one cannot possibly hide knowledge from each other, in which case, in any case, one cannot claim to be in good understanding relative what this site chess.com is all about.

Thanks sbodd!

But agreed: let's get ready to RUMBLE! :) 

Yo bro for that's called perpetual check which results with a draw,I go for that when my position is hopeless,but at the opening stage of the game it's pointless and unfair,if you have any queries,don't be shy to ask,regards,

Gabriel!

Yes, thanks bro. The thing is that I was this super-freshman and did not have a clue about this guy's mode of playing, keeping repeating his moves. I really thought that this guy was just fucking about since his position was far inferior to mine, that he kind of just messed about. I had no idea that in chess you have these rules that produce draws. I asked him what he was up to, and said: should we not play on, and that repetition did not bring the game further on. He did not grab the chance to enlighten me the little newbie and about total-ignorant about chess. Then, and I stress that I did not understand a shit, he obtained his draw. I am of the opinion that newbies should be informed and taught rather than exploited. I know it is perfectly "legal" but still I just found his ways excessively ridiculous... That is all there is to it. Later, yes, I have indeed read those rules. And I promise: if I ever enter an equal situation versus a new guy, I will NEVER play for a draw like that, remaining dumb as an oyster. I will tell the guy that since my situation looks hopeless, I will actually try play for a draw, and I will give him the link so that he himself can read about it, and thus gain a greater understanding of chess. Period. 

That's normally what I do,embaressing as it is,I tend to explain my situation and excuse myself,but some times it's the only(last)resort,maybe you were playing a smart arse,with a pervers sence of humor,ask satan when you bump in to him and block the dude from the gates held by Peter,then when your back home in hell you can play your diabolic chess against this dude and warm your spirits with a good bottle of Bushmills.

Put it down as experience,at lest now you know bro,even if it was by means of the cruel way.Yo I did'nt know that you had periods,lol!

All men have periods... :) But I will follow you advice.

How is it possible to have above 2100 in online chess and not knowing all about rules like draw by (3 times) repetition of moves?

Asmund, can you tell me how it actually happens that people reply to four year old threads?

I find it strange than anyone does not know this rule and several people here discussed it in this thread for a long time as if it was a very special rule lol.. Anyway case closed old news I guess..

If it's any consolation, I was thinking the same thing re: 2100+ rated player not knowing about perpetual check.  I also didn't realize the thread was that old at first.

He he good..