The link below is to a 10/0 game I played earlier today (sry, I don't know how to put the game directly in my post). I realize that I made a lot of mistakes, especially toward the end when I was in time trouble (I ended up losing on time). But what I wanted to ask is, moves 22 - 31 are clearly an example of threefold repitition (actually closer to fivefold), yet the game was not drawn immediately. Does threefold repitition not exist in blitz or something?
You have to claim draw and it will be given - threefold repitition draw isn't given automatically.
You have to claim draw and it will be given - threefold repitition isn't given automatically.
Really? so that's why...lol
yes but you have the claim the draw, Click the small "draw" button next to "resign" when you are about to repeat for the 3rd time.
O, thanks a lot! At least I'll know what to do next time.
ok. So can you just randomly move the same piece back and forth 3 times and no matter what you can claim a draw?? That sounds kinda cheap...
ohhhh ok that makes ALOT more sense. haha sorry
Three-fold repetition means that the same exact position is on the board with the same side to move.
Theoretically, you could have have the same position 10 moves apart each time and it still end in a draw if each time it is counted the pieces are in exactly the same position with the same person to move at each repetition.
weeeeeeerd that seems hard to do
Well, the most common occurrence of threefold repetition is three consecutive anyway, but the rule does specify not only must it be the same position and the same side to move, but also both sides must have the same moves available. So if one side loses the right to castle after two repetitions but before the third, the count starts over, and a position with the option of capturing en passant can never be the first repetition.
The ONLY "automatic" draws are stalemate on the board and a draw offer accepted by the opponent. Repetition and the 50-move rule must be claimed.
No, it's not 3 moves sequence but 3 same positions.
Not really, an important distinction which probably made my opponent miss it: