Author: Uri Blass
Date: 00:55:22 01/08/03
Go up one level in this thread
On January 08, 2003 at 03:48:26, scott farrell wrote: >On January 08, 2003 at 02:12:46, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On January 08, 2003 at 02:05:13, Nathan Thom wrote: >> >>>Hi again, this is a simple question yet I find that I dont actually know the >>>answer :) What exactly constitutes a draw by repetition? Is the following >>>definition strict enough? >>> >>>"If a position repeats three times with the same side to move, a draw can be >>>claimed." >>> >>>Does this mean any number of non-captures and non-pawn moves may be made between >>>these repeating positions? >> >>Yes >> >>The number of quiet moves is not important. >> >>The correct definition is that you can claim a draw even if the same position >>is going to happen third time in the next move and it is you to move. >> >>The same position means not only that the piece are on the same squares but also >>that the castling rights are the same and the possibility to capture is the >>same(no enpassant capture in the first time). > >How about side to move? Or is those somehow implicit? of course side to move should be the same. I forgot to mention it. Uri
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.