Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Help Forum

Help Forum

  1. 01 Aug '12 09:49 / 2 edits
    Dear All, I have a lovely opponent whom I play repeat games against. Her rating is very low, (not that I regard my rating as high at all – on the contrary), but I enjoy playing her and she is improving. She has now twice requested me to agree to a draw on the basis that she has repeated the same move three times. Admittedly she is genuine and certainly no chancer and this only happened when she had only her King on the board or the remaining pawn unable to move. To me the concept has always been quite clear and not an issue; but I seem to be quite unable to explain it to her in simple terms and she remains uncertain. I even Googled the concept and cut and pasted it for her. Here is the portion I Googled:-

    "Threefold Repetition
    If the same position is reached with the same player to move three times during a game, either player may immediately claim a draw. The procedure for claiming this draw varies somewhat between rule sets, but the rule itself is fairly standard across the board. This rule exists to stop games in which both sides are simply repeating moves.

    It's worth noting that there's no actual rule that allows players to claim a draw by perpetual check. However, the threefold repetition rule (along with the next type of draw) covers this eventuality; if one player is landing checks again and again without any way for their opponent to escape, they will eventually repeat the same position three times, forcing a draw."

    Come to think of it, this definition is not crystal and she seems to think that this definition proves her point.

    I also invited to her claim a draw to see if the computer agrees with her. We are not having an argument about it but I feel somewhat silly in not being able to convince her with a clear and simple definition of exactly what constitutes a Three Times Repetition Draw.

    Here are some of my advices to her:-

    “I cut and pasted the piece about three times repetition draws for you. Here it is. I noticed that I incorrectly told you both players must make the same move 3 times (although this could be the reason for such a draw.) It is actually one player making 3 repetitive moves WHICH HAS THE RESULT THAT THE SAME POSITION IS REACHED. To apply that to our game, it does not matter if you make the same move over and over again, the SAME POSITION IS NOT REACHED VIZ A VIZ ME. I hope that helps. But do write to the website, they will assist you.

    Another thing, if a player feels entitled to a draw (there is also the 50 move-rule draw), you can attempt to claim it. Look next to the board, there you will find "Claim draw". If ever you feel that you are entitled to one, attempt to claim one. The engine driving this site is very good and will advise you accordingly.

    Here is the cut and pasted portion…”

    So – to make a long story short; is anyone able to assist me with a lucid, simple and clear definition of a Three Times Repetition Draw? In fact so simple that a child would understand it?

    I may add that the explanation under FAQ's also did not convince her.

    May I also ask the following questions:- Such a draw is not automatic is it, as is the case with stalemate? Does one have to claim it? And I do suppose that any moves after the three repetitive moves mean you have forfeited the right to claim a draw?

    Kind regards
    Leon
  2. Subscriber C J Horse
    A stable personality
    01 Aug '12 10:32 / 1 edit
    You seem to have explained it very fully. It has to be a repetition of the same position on the board for both black and white pieces. Also the castling rights must be the same, ie if you have moved your king or rook(s) since the position was last reached, and can no longer castle, it is not the same position.

    No - it is not an automatic draw. You have to claim it when you make the move which produces the repeated position. If you do not claim it immediately, you can only make another claim if the repeated position occurs again.

    Hope that helps.
  3. 01 Aug '12 10:50
    That helps. Many thanks.
  4. Standard member RevRSleeker
    CerebrallyChallenged
    02 Aug '12 22:21
    On some sites a third repetition is automatically called a draw, by which I mean the site concludes the game for you with no player actually 'needing' to claim that draw..most all Blitz sites act in the same manner.
  5. 03 Aug '12 14:42
    Originally posted by RevRSleeker
    On some sites a third repetition is automatically called a draw, by which I mean the site concludes the game for you with no player actually 'needing' to claim that draw..most all Blitz sites act in the same manner.
    That's not according to FIDE rules, though. Draws by stalemate and insufficient material are automatic, all others must be claimed. Of course, any site can adopt different rules for themselves, but then you're no longer playing official chess.

    Richard
  6. Standard member RevRSleeker
    CerebrallyChallenged
    03 Aug '12 20:32
    Originally posted by Shallow Blue
    That's not according to FIDE rules, though. Draws by stalemate and insufficient material are automatic, all others must be claimed. Of course, any site can adopt different rules for themselves, but then you're no longer playing official chess.

    Richard
    Of course, you're quite right, I'm not sure why sites don;t adopt the across-the-board rules, perhaps it's just coding preference..I shall make an effort to find out which sites utilise what and why.. but all the Blitz sites I play ( and I play a fair few ! ) all adopt three repeat move automatic draws....
  7. Subscriber coquette
    Already mated
    03 Aug '12 21:39
    Here's just a fun little twist to ponder.

    Imagine that the rooks or knights are switched!

    The original King's rook is where the Queen's rook was, but the position is the same. Is that the same position or not?

    It's a draw, even though the pieces are different. That is, the board, from that moment of the position to the next move is the same. The history of how the pieces got there is forgotten.

    I think it's the strangest rule of chess.
  8. 04 Aug '12 13:50
    Originally posted by coquette
    Here's just a fun little twist to ponder.

    Imagine that the rooks or knights are switched!

    The original King's rook is where the Queen's rook was, but the position is the same. Is that the same position or not?

    It's a draw, even though the pieces are different. That is, the board, from that moment of the position to the next move is the same. The h ...[text shortened]... tory of how the pieces got there is forgotten.

    I think it's the strangest rule of chess.
    Depends on whether you could castle in the first position. If so, it's not the same position, because you could castle before and cannot castle now. If you couldn't castle before, either (e.g., because the king had moved), it is the same position.

    And yes, three-repeat draw is the off-side rule (or LBW, for cricket fans) of chess.

    Richard
  9. Subscriber coquette
    Already mated
    05 Aug '12 05:35
    Originally posted by Shallow Blue
    Depends on whether you could castle in the first position. If so, it's not the same position, because you could castle before and cannot castle now. If you couldn't castle before, either (e.g., because the king had moved), it is the same position.

    And yes, three-repeat draw is the off-side rule (or LBW, for cricket fans) of chess.

    Richard
    oh yeah? castle still a move or not, same position, but different, because the options to move are different!

    i like that!
  10. 06 Aug '12 13:44
    Originally posted by coquette
    oh yeah? castle still a move or not, same position, but different, because the options to move are different!

    i like that!
    You're not the only one: so does FIDE. It's the official rule. See here:

    http://www.fide.com/component/handbook/?id=124&view=article

    under point 9.2.

    Richard
  11. 09 Aug '12 15:34
    On the topic of automatic 3 time repetition draws - it so happens that within a day after reading all the contributions hereon, that I felt I had accomplished exactly that in a game where I was in desperate trouble, but it was a rapid game and whilst I was still attempting to claim the draw with my over-sized fingers - my opponent - bless him - had moved... So - is there not method in the madness of suggesting that it should be automatic?
  12. 10 Aug '12 12:56
    Originally posted by Outback
    On the topic of automatic 3 time repetition draws - it so happens that within a day after reading all the contributions hereon, that I felt I had accomplished exactly that in a game where I was in desperate trouble, but it was a rapid game and whilst I was still attempting to claim the draw with my over-sized fingers - my opponent - bless him - had moved... So - is there not method in the madness of suggesting that it should be automatic?
    No - claim first, move second.

    This, too, is how the FIDE rule requires it: you claim that your next move will cause a position to occur for the third time, write it down, call over the arbiter, and when he has confirmed that you're correct, you make your move and the game is drawn.
    On this site, at least in non-Blitz: click "claim draw", then move. I don't know if Blitz is different, but it shouldn't be.

    (The situation is slightly different if your opponent caused the third appearance, but the idea is similar: you claim (in this case that the position has appeared thrice, rather than that it will) before you move. After you move, you lose your chance to claim a draw. At that point, you can only offer a draw, and your opponent is free to reject it, for example, by not repeating the position.)

    Richard
  13. 10 Aug '12 16:17
    Now that it is crisp and sound advice -thank you