Or when moves are repeated 3 times
Draw? Really?
Sort:
TibsClark wrote:
Or when moves are repeated 3 times
This is not correct. The position has to be repeated 3 times, the move order doesn't matter.
7 days ago
0
#65
magipi skrev:
TibsClark wrote:
Or when moves are repeated 3 times
This is not correct. The position has to be repeated 3 times, the move order doesn't matter.
LOL
Nilslomattsing wrote:
magipi skrev:
TibsClark wrote:
Or when moves are repeated 3 times
This is not correct. The position has to be repeated 3 times, the move order doesn't matter.
LOL
LOL all you want, that's the rule.
7 days ago
0
#67
magipi skrev:
Nilslomattsing wrote:
magipi skrev:
TibsClark wrote:
Or when moves are repeated 3 times
This is not correct. The position has to be repeated 3 times, the move order doesn't matter.
LOL
LOL all you want, that's the rule.
I know thats the rule but... Hard to explain.
Nilslomattsing wrote:
magipi skrev:
Nilslomattsing wrote:
magipi skrev:
TibsClark wrote:
Or when moves are repeated 3 times
This is not correct. The position has to be repeated 3 times, the move order doesn't matter.
LOL
LOL all you want, that's the rule.
I know thats the rule but... Hard to explain.
It is hard to explain. I think the best way is to just say any position that appears identically 3 times throughout the game.
Tibs was kind of right when he says "or when moves are repeated 3 times". The position has to be repeated 3 times, and the only way to do that is to have the moves repeated 3 times. Not where the pieces move FROM, but where the pieces move TO.
ok
7 days ago
0
#70
lfPatriotGames wrote:
...
Tibs was kind of right when he says "or when moves are repeated 3 times". The position has to be repeated 3 times, and the only way to do that is to have the moves repeated 3 times. Not where the pieces move FROM, but where the pieces move TO.
It's best to talk about positions though as it's possible that multiple different pieces moved but individual ones may not have moved to a square more than once.
If all the pieces are on the exact same squares three or more times in a game, with the same side to move each time, and the same possible moves available each time, then a draw by triple repetition of position can be claimed (or is automatic in live games here).
Martin_Stahl wrote:
lfPatriotGames wrote:
...
Tibs was kind of right when he says "or when moves are repeated 3 times". The position has to be repeated 3 times, and the only way to do that is to have the moves repeated 3 times. Not where the pieces move FROM, but where the pieces move TO.
It's best to talk about positions though as it's possible that multiple different pieces moved but individual ones may not have moved to a square more than once.
If all the pieces are on the exact same squares three or more times in a game, with the same side to move each time, and the same possible moves available each time, then a draw by triple repetition of position can be claimed (or is automatic in live games here).
Yes. And the only way to do that is have the pieces that make up that identical position move TO the squares that make up that position.
I think people get confused about the moving part, assuming the same moves have to repeated in succession. It seems to me the only way to have a repetition draw is to have the pieces move TO that position, regardless of where they started from.
lfPatriotGames wrote:
Tibs was kind of right when he says "or when moves are repeated 3 times". The position has to be repeated 3 times, and the only way to do that is to have the moves repeated 3 times. Not where the pieces move FROM, but where the pieces move TO.
This is absolutely not true.
Imagine that you move your knight back-and forth once, then your bishop back-and-forth, and your opponent does the same. In this case, no move was repeated even once, but the position repeated 3 times, and it's a draw.
6 days ago
0
#73
Is there an arbiter in the chat? Instead of moderators...we get have arbiter moderators! Brilliant!
magipi wrote:
lfPatriotGames wrote:
Tibs was kind of right when he says "or when moves are repeated 3 times". The position has to be repeated 3 times, and the only way to do that is to have the moves repeated 3 times. Not where the pieces move FROM, but where the pieces move TO.
This is absolutely not true.
Imagine that you move your knight back-and forth once, then your bishop back-and-forth, and your opponent does the same. In this case, no move was repeated even once, but the position repeated 3 times, and it's a draw.
I guess I'm not understanding that. If the move is not repeated, if a piece is not moved to the squares that make up the position, how does the position get repeated 3 times?
In every position (except the opening position) a piece was moved to a square and that position is then considered a position. A piece has to move TO the square that makes up that position, regardless of where that piece came from.
In your example it seems to me the only way for the position to be repeated 3 times is for the pieces to be moved, or returned, to that position 3 times. Maybe I'm just not wording it correctly. Could you display a diagram that illustrates what you are thinking?
lfPatriotGames wrote:
magipi wrote:
lfPatriotGames wrote:
Tibs was kind of right when he says "or when moves are repeated 3 times". The position has to be repeated 3 times, and the only way to do that is to have the moves repeated 3 times. Not where the pieces move FROM, but where the pieces move TO.
This is absolutely not true.
Imagine that you move your knight back-and forth once, then your bishop back-and-forth, and your opponent does the same. In this case, no move was repeated even once, but the position repeated 3 times, and it's a draw.
I guess I'm not understanding that. If the move is not repeated, if a piece is not moved to the squares that make up the position, how does the position get repeated 3 times?
In every position (except the opening position) a piece was moved to a square and that position is then considered a position. A piece has to move TO the square that makes up that position, regardless of where that piece came from.
In your example it seems to me the only way for the position to be repeated 3 times is for the pieces to be moved, or returned, to that position 3 times. Maybe I'm just not wording it correctly. Could you display a diagram that illustrates what you are thinking?
Imagine the starting position.
1. Nc3 Nc6 2. Nb1 Nb6 (position repeated) 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Ng1 and black can claim a draw with the intention of repeating the position the third time with Ng8.
I actually had to explain this whole thing to an IM (!) at a tournament fairly recently. I claimed a draw for a threefold repetition of the position and he was very surprised as the moves were different and the episode happened over appr. 6/7 moves. Thankfully it was a classical game so I had the scoresheet as proof.
4 days ago
0
#77
To me the rule is not complicated. 3 times the same position with the same side to move.
What is complicated to me is spotting it on the scoresheet. Tbh I tried and gave up.
What is complicated to me is spotting it on the scoresheet. Tbh I tried and gave up.
4 days ago
0
#79
Buster_Blunder skrev:
Hi all!
I finally did great against this 1500 bot. I was ahead all game. (I swear the better you do, even 1500 rated bots crank up their ability if they are losing, it's feels pretty obvious--even computers don't want to lose).
I ended up promoting THREE pawns to Queens...I had three queens on the board, and had the king cornered.......................and the game calls DRAW????!!! That feels so bad. I know it's a general rule I just don't get, but it makes no sense to my puny brain. I would have had him mated in one move (Q>g1)....and it forces a draw? Feels bad. I had this game. I assume we reached a move count that calls draw no matter what?
STALEMATE
Draw is when king has no legal move or is out of pieces