If you claim a draw eg. ten moves after the threefold repetition, does it count
Repeat Moves In Drawn Position
Sort:
?
solflores wrote:
If you claim a draw eg. ten moves after the threefold repetition, does it count
Not for threefold repetition:
| 9.2.1 | The game is drawn, upon a correct claim by a player having the move, when the same position for at least the third time (not necessarily by a repetition of moves): |
| 9.2.1.2 |
has just appeared, and the player claiming the draw has the move. |
So if the player wishing to claim has missed it, it cannot be claimed for the threefold repetition and 50 moves.
Fivefold repetition and 75 moves are supposedly automatic.
ok thanks, I thought so
Jan 12, 2019
0
#26
Seeking Clarification "position repeats 3 times"
Lets say I give a player an area that they can move in (lets say pinned by a bishop that protected by king see below) then start to march a pawn down to gain a winning piece. Then simply moving into the same position three times is a stalemate?! If the pawn mentioned above is in it's original position when the bishop/ king pinned the enemy king it would be a minimum of 5 moves just to turn it into a queen (let alone get into a checkmate position). i.e. I loose before the queen is made or am forced to let him outside his cage?
^^By moving the pawn you are changing the position on the board. There is no repetition in the above example. You must consider the entire board.
Jan 12, 2019
0
#29
It's not even really "both players repeating," it is that the position (which can be thought of, in simple and slightly inaccurate terms, as a snapshot view of the board) is the same - all pieces on exactly the same squares (and all castling and/or en passant rights preserved) and the same player to move. Yes, that is most often accomplished by a simple repetition back and forth. However, if it happens through a roundabout series of moves, it is still considered a repetition of the position. For example, if, through a series of checks, the king moves from g1 to g2 to g3 to h2 and back to g1, that can be seen as a repetition if all other pieces have also returned to their same squares when the king returns to g1.
I believe it also has to be the same player's move when the position is repeated. If a position repeats with Black to move, then White, then Black, it's not a draw. I recall hearing a rather famous game incorrectly declared a draw on this.
omnipaul wrote:
It's not even really "both players repeating," it is that the position (which can be thought of, in simple and slightly inaccurate terms, as a snapshot view of the board) is the same - all pieces on exactly the same squares (and all castling and/or en passant rights preserved) and the same player to move. Yes, that is most often accomplished by a simple repetition back and forth. However, if it happens through a roundabout series of moves, it is still considered a repetition of the position. For example, if, through a series of checks, the king moves from g1 to g2 to g3 to h2 and back to g1, that can be seen as a repetition if all other pieces have also returned to their same squares when the king returns to g1.
Is that most often?
Under the 50 move rule, a draw is also claimable if there have been no captures or pawn moves in 50 moves. 50 move rule does not mention en passant rights (only 1 move difference) or loss of castling rights (might be a lot of difference, there are 4 of them, but rare to have any left by endgame).
An implication is that a fortress can only be attacked twice. If you have a certain position 5 moves after last capture or pawn move, then attack over 20 moves failing and leading to exact same position on move 25, followed by a different line of attack also returning to exact same position on move 45, then threefold repetition has occurred, and the defender can claim the draw and forbid the attacker from trying a third, again different attack.
ChessSponge wrote:
ravio84 wrote:
Oh! @omnipaul i concede, that my king was vulnerable. and i did say seemingly stronger (maybe only by material) but i was forced a draw by the system through the players moves, i always considered that if the person who is repeating checks should change his moves, as the onus is on him to get the game going. can i get credit for bad sportsmanship from his end? or he did the right thing and forced a draw?
I too, played hoping he'd change his tactic and that point in time i considered those moves ideal.
Also" thanks for the time to look through the game. i just wanna make sure i understand the nuances and not make the same mistake again
The responsibility to stop the repetition is on whichever person does not want a draw. If stopping the repetition would put either player at a disadvantage then likely neither player would wish to stop it and the draw would happen.
In your case you could have stopped the draw and been in a better position than your opponent which means it would be on you to stop the repetition and it would be on him to try to keep the repetition going to get the draw since he was worse off.
There is absolutely no bad sportsmanship in causing repetition.
Let's say my king only has 3 spots it can move to 2 of them are checks only the 3rd is checkmate why should I be forced to give a checkmate when I have 2 other spots that keep me in the game.
It's on your opponent to get the check mate and it's on you to prevent them from getting a check mate so no it's not on both players to stop a game.from ending due to repetition it's only on the one who initiated the check
A little off topic but very much related. I was in a game recently where my king was the only piece on the board and I was put in a position where I could only move one of two spots was trapped on h7 and 8. His Queen was on G6 with his pawn marching down the f file when it got to to f6 Queen to G7 was mate. And then he started watching all his other pawns down all I could do was go back and forth in the same two spots with mate just a move away, to do anything else was piling on but I thought in that poor sportsmanship would come back to bite him with getting a draw for repeat moves. But allows that is apparently not the case . If there's no rule punishing this behavior, there should be. Any thoughts?
aflfooty wrote:
According to my last game after offering draw using draw icon it was rejected. Then I actually repeated draw position 11 times with opponent . The system was timing me down during this charade and I realised that "the system" would not accept a draw automatically, Potential result lose on time !!
Draw In This situation: King moves in only two allowable positions while being checked each time.
As I was in a weaker position this was my best stategically created result
My only conclusion is maybe I must hit draw offer countless times until system switches in to do it automatically.
The other player also has to repeat their 3 moves too...
BossAtha wrote:
The other player also has to repeat their 3 moves too...
It's not about repeating moves, it's about repeating the position. As it was explained earlier in this topic. More than 13 years ago.
Optimissed wrote:
Five times, I believe. That's not rules of chess but the way the engine here works.
Three times on chess.com.
In FIDE rated tournaments, a player can claim a draw after 3 times, and the arbiter will stop the game after 5. On chess.com,. even 3 times is an auto-draw.
Also a little off topic but again trying to move pieces ….I once saw a very rare game on the site which allowed for a pawn move ( under en passant conditions) to be played to create the checkmate position.If you were a beginner and not familiar with this move you could touch all the pieces on the board but not move the right pawn to the right position ( complete the en passant) to avoid checkmate and be puzzled why it wasn’t checkmate. Yes you would lose the game by time or resigning but it wouldn’t technically be checkmate stopping the game automatically.
@ChessSponge Hmmm... I guess thats fair. I'll remember that next time. Thanks for your time.