3 move rule -- in successon?
Sort:
[COMMENT DELETED]
You are on the right trail when you question repeated positions in succession. The positions need not be successive.
Jun 23, 2012
0
#3
No the position has to be repeated three times but not neccesarily conseculatively. So if you move your piece for instance back and forth but the opponent moves all around the board it will only be a 3 fold when the opponent piece hits the same square three times.
Jun 23, 2012
0
#4
GeorgeSpiggott wrote:
The opponent declared a draw in this game, i guess I'm still a newb, I thought the three move repetition had to be both players, in succession. I was being careful to avoid that until I could think of a different approach...
(it WAS 3am!)
So, I have been misunderstanding the rule?
Here is a perfect example in a game I had against Andreamendoza - a wall of pawns 2 kings either side, I moved my king simply back and forth but the opponent moved her king around the board until she ran out of different squares, it was a good draw for me against a higher rated player.
http://www.chess.com/echess/game.html?id=48590917
Jun 23, 2012
0
#5
Three times the same position on the board in the same game with the same player to move is enough to claim a draw - in succesion is not required.
but there are some other conditions for the "same position" to be regarded:
- same possibilities to castle for both players (0-O, O-O-O) ?
- existing right to take en passant at the first time ?
Jun 23, 2012
0
#6
If you're not clear about any chess rules, you can always look here:-
http://www.chess.com/learn-how-to-play-chess.html
(It's under Learn/Basic Rules.. )
But the one that applies in this instance is -
- A player declares a draw if the same exact position is repeated three times (though not necessarily three times in a row)