159 ( +1 | -1 ) "repetition" drawARGH! I am angry right now...
I just learned (the hard way) about a rule of either chess in general or this site in particular... the "threefold repetition draw"...
I was playing a game (board #315345) as black. In the endgame, I had my queen and 4 pawns remaining, while my opponent had his queen and 3 pawns. I was able to advance one of my pawns all the way to the 2nd-to-last rank, so that advancing it one more square would promote it and virtually assure me a victory.
At this point in time, my opponent began repeatedly putting my king in check with his queen. Even though the checks were harmless and posed no significant threat of mate, he continued to move his queen around and put me in check so that I could not promote my pawn.
After a certain number of repetitions of this, I suppose my king and his queen had ended up in the same positions 3 times, and gameknot ended the game as a draw.
I have never been so angry and disappointed at the outcome of a game. I worked very diligently to gain myself an advantage in the endgame, playing as black as well. And then as soon as I had the game "wrapped up", my opponent was able to use a loophole to deny me the victory that I had (IMO) rightfully earned!!!
Is this a common rule of chess? Is it always a forced draw? I should think that the two sides would have to agree on ending the game as a draw. I think that is a very, very cheap and underhanded way to escape from a game that should rightfully have been a loss.
33 ( +1 | -1 ) ...---...Well...now you know. I've done simular, once had a massive material advantage and allowed stalemate. Look at it this way..it's a lession you'll not forget! Those are the ones you remember. BTW..nice play with your Rooks there in the middlegame. Regards victord
60 ( +1 | -1 ) sigh...yeah I guess so... I definitely won't forget it...
so technically there is no way I could have avoided a draw once he started putting me in check, is there? as long as he kept positioning his queen in such a way to keep my king on the last rank, and kept putting me in check repeatedly, it was inevitable that eventually we would have a threefold repetition... correct?
therefore the correct way for me to have avoided this situation would have been to keep my queen active and not allow her to be blocked off by my pawn?
just trying to learn from my mistakes... thanks for any comments (thanks victor!)
116 ( +1 | -1 ) Yes it's a standard ruleCheck here the full laws of chess: handbook.fide.com/handbook.cgi?level=E&level=E1&level=01&
"The game may be drawn if any identical position is about to appear or has appeared on the chessboard at least three times."
The position in your game is a clear draw, even if that rule didn't exist: how can you promote your pawn? If the rule doesn't exists, after 50 checks of your opponent this other rulew would apply then:
"The game may be drawn if each player has made the last 50 consecutive moves without the movement of any pawn and without the capture of any piece."
Anyway, the draw in your game is not automatical: GameKnot recognizes the repetition and asks to the player having the move if he wants to draw or wants to continue.
You worked diligently but 44...d3 is not sufficient to win, and you have no advantages; 44...Qc2 was better. Furthermore, 46...d2 is again a bad move: the position is now draw.
In conclusion, the game shouldn't rightfully have been a loss: it's not sufficient to promote a pawn to win; the goal of the game is to checkmate the opponent :)
36 ( +1 | -1 ) yeah i made a mistakeI see now that I made some mistakes... thank you brunetti for your analysis... I was just disappointed because I wasn't aware of that rule and thought I had a sure victory. I wasn't aware of the 50 moves rule either, that is good to know.
I definitely would have had much better chance to win with 44... Qc2. oh well, live and learn.