Draws by repition?

What if the QR and KR, or QN and KN, or both are "switched" in the "identical position," is it still a draw by repitition? Please note, this isn't a trivial question, as the "position" is actually "identical," as we can't distinguish the pieces that got switched, except by tracking them. On the other hand, if they carry their identity through the game, then they are different.

Originally posted by coquette
What if the QR and KR, or QN and KN, or both are "switched" in the "identical position," is it still a draw by repitition? Please note, this isn't a trivial question, as the "position" is actually "identical," as we can't distinguish the pieces that got switched, except by tracking them. On the other hand, if they carry their identity through the game, then they are different.

Yes, still the same position. It's the position, with a different Rook or Knight.

Just keep in mind, the original Rook would need to be where the other Rook was, or it is NOT the same position.

P-

OTB I turn my knights to face the King. Anytime a tactical or positional motif comes up concerning the knights I can tell which one is the one involved. Hasn't helped yet, but one day....

Originally posted by MontyMoose
OTB I turn my knights to face the King. Anytime a tactical or positional motif comes up concerning the knights I can tell which one is the one involved. Hasn't helped yet, but one day....

Ok, but I don't see how the "information" of which is which is going to help if it doesn't matter," and the only way that it would matter is if it involves a draw by repitition, which I suppose, now, it doesn't. Am I missing something?

Originally posted by coquette
What if the QR and KR, or QN and KN, or both are "switched" in the "identical position," is it still a draw by repitition? Please note, this isn't a trivial question, as the "position" is actually "identical," as we can't distinguish the pieces that got switched, except by tracking them. On the other hand, if they carry their identity through the game, then they are different.

There is one case, and AFAICT only that one case, in which they're not the same position, and that is if before switch your rooks, at least one of them had not moved from its original position, and neither had the king. This would mean that before, there would still be the possibility of castling, and after, there would not be.
It's a marginal exception at best, of course, since when are you going to encounter a situation in which all of the above holds, and you are going to switch the rooks? Almost certainly never, in real play.

Richard

Originally posted by coquette
Ok, but I don't see how the "information" of which is which is going to help if it doesn't matter," and the only way that it would matter is if it involves a draw by repitition, which I suppose, now, it doesn't. Am I missing something?

Either position has the same fen. That's the same position regardless which Knight or Rook it was in the same given positions.

Originally posted by MontyMoose
OTB I turn my knights to face the King. Anytime a tactical or positional motif comes up concerning the knights I can tell which one is the one involved. Hasn't helped yet, but one day....

Glad to hear I'm not the only wood pusher needing to know where the knights started. I've already told my boy (3 years old) the knights should start facing the king and queen. Why? Who Knows!~

P-

Originally posted by Shallow Blue
There is one case, and AFAICT only that one case, in which they're not the same position, and that is if before switch your rooks, at least one of them had not moved from its original position, and neither had the king. This would mean that before, there would still be the possibility of castling, and after, there would not be.
It's a marginal excepti ...[text shortened]... and you are going to switch the rooks? Almost certainly never, in real play.

Richard

That "exception" isn't really an exception, since on rook hasn't moved yet, therefor, while it's correct that the positions aren't the same, neither have the rooks actually switched places. Oddly, it does apply, if one were to "analyze" the position from a naive perspective, i.e., not knowing the game history, then knowing whether castling were still an option or not would be a consideration. Thus, it's an important distinction in determining other things, such as zugzwang, or stalemate, but NOT a draw by repitition.

Originally posted by coquette
What if the QR and KR, or QN and KN, or both are "switched" in the "identical position," is it still a draw by repitition? Please note, this isn't a trivial question, as the "position" is actually "identical," as we can't distinguish the pieces that got switched, except by tracking them. On the other hand, if they carry their identity through the game, then they are different.

FIDE rule 10.10:
-----
The game is drawn, upon a claim by the player having the move, when the same position, for the third time:
(a) is about to appear, if he first writes the move on his scoresheet and declares to the arbiter his intention of making this move; or
(b) has just appeared, the same player having the move each time.

The position is considered the same if pieces of the same kind and colour occupy the same squares, and if all the possible moves of all the pieces are the same, including the rights to castle [at some future time] or to capture a pawn "en passant".
-----
This is the definitive answer. Whether it is a QN or KN, KR or QR, etc., doesn't matter. The only things that matter are whose move it is, same kind of piece and color, and possible moves available.

Originally posted by HolyT
FIDE rule 10.10:
-----
The game is drawn, upon a claim by the player having the move, when the same position, for the third time:
(a) is about to appear, if he first writes the move on his scoresheet and declares to the arbiter his intention of making this move; or
(b) has just appeared, the same player having the move each time.

The position is consi ...[text shortened]... that matter are whose move it is, same kind of piece and color, and possible moves available.

Correct.