Question on Repitition rule
TROY JOHNSON
mode so that it was playing against itself. There reached a point in
the game that the white queen had the black king in check and black
moved a rook between King and Queen. White moved threatening queen
away so black moved the defending rook away. Once the rook was no
longer in the way the queen put the king back in check. This scenario
happened three times then the computer called a draw and the screen
said that this was because of a three repitition rule. Is this a rule
that would be enforced at a USCF tournament? (What I am basically
asking is this a legitimate rule?)
Question two: If I am playing a human opponent and I put his King
in check with my Queen and he moves out of check then I put him back
in check with my queen, what happens after several repititions of this
scenario? If this makes the game a draw can I force a repititive move
so as to get a draw against a better player. If I were to put someone
in check can I keep putting them in check even if I have other moves?
And if I do this is the game considered a draw?
Thank You for your time in answering this question.
Hope to see you all on the ICS; my handle is Lemming and I hope to
play you a game sometime.
Elston Gunn
: I was playing a computer program called EdChess
: the computer called a draw and the screen
: said that this was because of a three repetition rule. Is this a rule
: asking is this a legitimate rule?)
Yes. Repetition of the same position three times with the same piece on
the move and with other aspects unchanged (e.g. no en passant or
castling previously possible and now not possible) is a draw, but ONLY if
the player whose move it is claims the draw BEFORE making a move of his own.
The rule would be enforced at at USCF tournament IF an acceptable current
scoresheet is available by which to verify the threefold repetition.
However, if neither party claims the draw, the game continues on; ditto
if the scoresheet does not confirm the threefold repetition (I failed in
a draw claim on this basis once -- I was certain I was planning to make
the move which would create the threefold repetition, but when the
scoresheet was played out before the Tournament Director, there were only
two repetitions).
: Question two: If I am playing a human opponent and I put his King
: in check with my Queen and he moves out of check then I put him back
: in check with my queen, what happens after several repetitions of this
: scenario? If this makes the game a draw can I force a repetitive move
: so as to get a draw against a better player. If I were to put someone
: in check can I keep putting them in check even if I have other moves?
: And if I do this is the game considered a draw?
Again, if the exact position is repeating three times, the previous rule
applies. However, if you can continue to check repeatedly without
repeating positions, and there is no escape from the checks, you can also
claim a draw on the basis of perpetual check (call the TD over and
demonstrate to him if your opponent objects; you better be correct or you
will be penalized for a false claim).
And yes, you can play any legal move open to you. There is nothing wrong
with continually checking if that's what you want to do. If you decide
to stop checking and play another move, that's your decision (and risk).
M.A. Powe
: longer in the way the queen put the king back in check. This scenario
: happened three times then the computer called a draw and the screen
: said that this was because of a three repitition rule. Is this a rule
: that would be enforced at a USCF tournament? (What I am basically
: asking is this a legitimate rule?)
Yes.
: Question two: If I am playing a human opponent and I put his King
: in check with my Queen and he moves out of check then I put him back
: in check with my queen, what happens after several repititions of this
: scenario? If this makes the game a draw can I force a repititive move
: so as to get a draw against a better player. If I were to put someone
: in check can I keep putting them in check even if I have other moves?
: And if I do this is the game considered a draw?
The "draw by repetition of position" rule states that if the same
position occurs three times, with the same player on move, the game can
be declared a draw by either player. Essentially, all the pieces and
pawns must be in the exact same positions each time, with the same player
having to move. "The same position" includes the proviso that in the
meantime some pieces have not lost the right to make certain moves, e.g.
to castle or capture en passant. The tricky part is that the repeated
positions do not have to be consecutive. (Hence, the part about losing
the right to make certain moves.) The rule is most often invoked via
perpetual check, as in your example. But it is possible for position A
to occur, then five moves later recur, then 3 moves later recur again.
If you were sharp enough to note this recurrence, you could claim a draw.
A year or so ago, Andy Soltis wrote an interesting column in Chess Life
on this topic, showing some games by famous players in which draws by
repetition occurred but were not noticed.
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
do...@teleport.com Michael Powe
"What hath night to do with sleep?" --Milton
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Jason M. Rotenberg
position happen three times. I tried to claim a draw but when I typed
"draw" a draw offer was sent instead which was rejected. I was running
out of time so I could not ask questions. How do I claim a draw in such
situation? No TD on ICS!
dpac...@news.delphi.com
>Yes. Repetition of the same position three times with the same piece on
>the move and with other aspects unchanged (e.g. no en passant or
>castling previously possible and now not possible) is a draw, but ONLY if
>the player whose move it is claims the draw BEFORE making a move of his own.
The proper procedure under USCF rule 14C2 is to "write this move
on the score sheet, not play the move on the board, stop both clocks,
and state the claim."
>Again, if the exact position is repeating three times, the previous rule
>applies. However, if you can continue to check repeatedly without
>repeating positions, and there is no escape from the checks, you can also
>claim a draw on the basis of perpetual check (call the TD over and
>demonstrate to him if your opponent objects; you better be correct or you
>will be penalized for a false claim).
This may be true under some federations, but USCF rule 14C1 clearly states
"there is also no rule regarding 'perpetual check.'"
Dale
The rule is not a sequence of moves, but three times when the POSITION
repeats itself. In other words, if a particular position repeats itself
3 times, no matter when they happen, a player can claim a draw. It could
happen on move 40, 45 and 67 -- it does not have to be consecutive.
Obviously, in order for a position to repeat there cannot be any captures
or pawn advances -- since these change the position to never be able to
recreate a previous one.
Also, since it does not have to be in a row, claiming 3rd repetition
usually involved the tournament director making sure via the scoresheet...
TROY JOHNSON (tjoh...@herbie.unl.edu) wrote:
: I was playing a computer program called EdChess in the autoplay