15 Jul 08
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.
15 Jul 08
1 edit
Originally posted by coquetteYes, still the same position. It's the position, with a different Rook or Knight.
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.
Just keep in mind, the original Rook would need to be where the other Rook was, or it is NOT the same position.
P-
16 Jul 08
Originally posted by MontyMooseOk, 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?
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....
- Joined
- 18 Jan 07
- Moves
- 12477
16 Jul 08
Originally posted by coquetteThere 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.
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.
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
16 Jul 08
Originally posted by coquetteEither position has the same fen. That's the same position regardless which Knight or Rook it was in the same given positions.
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?
16 Jul 08
Originally posted by MontyMooseGlad 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!~
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....
P-
16 Jul 08
Originally posted by Shallow BlueThat "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.
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
16 Jul 08
Originally posted by coquetteFIDE rule 10.10:
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.
-----
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.
16 Jul 08
Originally posted by HolyTCorrect.
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.