Answers.Body: <p>It's a repetition draw, claimable by either side (black on the previous move).</p>
  <p>If you believe that &quot;commencing the game&quot; is something different from &quot;having and playing the move&quot; then please explain from the FIDE laws what you do when you &quot;commence the game&quot;. How about standing up and proclaiming loudly &quot;the game has commenced&quot; and sitting dow again? Obviously not. &quot;Commencing the game&quot; is only different from &quot;having and playing the move&quot; in that it also indicates it's the first time that white has the move in the game - which is purely informational without legal implications.</p>
  <p>The initial game position is as much a position as any other one and after 4. ... Ng8 it appears for the third time with the same player on move. So it is subject to a (pre-)claimed draw. White need not announce 5.Nf3 as the required double repetition was already completed.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-07-27T13:10:00.493Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2021-07-28T16:02:30.167Z
Answers.LastEditDate: 2021-07-28T16:02:30.167Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Guus Rol
Answers.Body: <p>This is a funny situation - in a FIDE tournament, it depends on whether you're talking about White or Black. To claim a draw in FIDE tournaments the procedure is as follows:</p>
  
  <p>1) Write down the move you are planning to make that will result in a three-fold repetition. Do NOT make the move.</p>
  
  <p>2) Call over the arbiter and explain what move you're about to make, and how this results in a three-fold. The arbiter checks it over and declares the game drawn.</p>
  
  <p>So after 4.Ng1, if Black wanted to claim a draw he'd write 4...Ng8 down and call the arbiter over. The game would then be declared drawn. If he actually made the move 4...Ng8 and tried calling the aribter over, he could not claim a draw since it's not his turn. It's extremely weird, but this is how it works. So assuming the diagram position has been reached in a real game, Black could not claim a draw there (it's not his turn).</p>
  
  <p>Meanwhile, White could claim a draw in the position you posted. Not because of the fact that the position has been repeated three times, but because if he moves 5.Nf3, the resulting position has been seen three times. So he'd write down 5.Nf3, call the aribter over, etc.</p>
  
  <p>I've known people who have missed out on a draw and ending up losing their game because they weren't aware of this technicality in FIDE tournaments. It's borderline ridiculous but those are the rules.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2019-09-17T03:39:01.550Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2019-09-17T03:39:01.550Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Inertial Ignorance
Answers.Body: <p>This is a better question than it seems at first glance.</p>
  
  <p>Intuitively it seems possible to claim a draw, since the position appears to have occurred three times.</p>
  
  <p><strong>However,</strong> according to a strict reading of the rules, the position after 4...Ng8 has appeared only for the second time. The relevant clauses are 9.2:</p>
  
  <blockquote>
    <p>[...] Positions are considered the same if and only if the same player
    <strong>has the move</strong>, [...]</p>
  </blockquote>
  
  <p>and 1.1 about the start of the game:</p>
  
  <blockquote>
    <p>The player with the white pieces commences the game. A player is said
    to ‘<strong>have the move</strong>’, when his opponent’s move has been ‘made’.</p>
  </blockquote>
  
  <p>In the starting position, white does not "have the move" since black did not make a prior move, white merely commences the game. Therefore, the positions before 1. Nf3 and after 4...Ng8 are <strong>not</strong> the same, and a draw cannot be claimed yet.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2018-12-09T17:08:31.763Z
Answers.Text: Very satisfying answer! The rules do seem to use "have the move" as a formal notion.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Tom 7
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2018-12-09T19:53:51.833Z
Answers.Text: https://chess.stackexchange.com/a/19774/14079 Please see my similar answer to that question.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Evargalo
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2018-12-10T03:36:34.583Z
Answers.Text: "According to a strict reading of the rules", sure. But in reality, I don't think most arbiters would go for this. Under this interpretation, White cannot adjust the pieces at the start of the game ("Only the player having the move may adjust one or more pieces on their squares") - but that doesn't matter much, because touch move can't apply anyway ("if the player having the move touches..."). And the glossary entry for "move" says "having the move refers to the player’s right to play next."
Answers.UserDisplayName: D M
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2018-12-10T09:33:54.953Z
Answers.Text: But white _can_ claim a draw if he first writes down 5.Nf3 without making it, then claims.
Answers.UserDisplayName: RemcoGerlich
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2018-12-10T13:52:29.083Z
Answers.Text: But black can't claim a draw writing down 4...Ng8 before playing it, which was the point of the question. Of course white can make a valid claim by intending 5.Nf3.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Remellion
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-05-27T22:43:30.083Z
Answers.Text: The only arts. that specify a player must move only his own pieces are arts. 4.3 and 4.4. Each applies only to the player having the move, so by the same token White can start the game with e.g. Pg7-g5.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Martin Rattigan
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-07-27T19:36:03.003Z
Answers.Text: As an (NA level) arbiter, I assure you we love to discuss this question in our seminars, and the first poor git that suggests "So, why doesn't the FIDE simply say that White has the move in the opening position?!" will always be ceremonially sacrificed to Cthulhu :-)
Answers.UserDisplayName: Hauke Reddmann
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2022-01-27T21:02:48.540Z
Answers.Text: Would the rules allow an arbiter to inform the players that proper sportsmanship requires a bona fide effort to play an actual game, and that failure to do so would represent sufficiently poor sportsmanship that he would score the game as a double forfeit?
Answers.UserDisplayName: supercat
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2018-12-09T06:24:45.523Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2018-12-09T06:24:45.523Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Remellion
Body: <p>Is this position a draw?</p>
  
  <pre><code>[FEN ""]
  1. Nf3 Nf6 2. Ng1 Ng8 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Ng1 Ng8
  </code></pre>
  
  <p>I don't mean to ask the age-old question "Is chess a draw?"; four moves have been played here, returning to the starting position. Since the start position has appeared three times, it seems that white can claim a draw by threefold repetition. However, lichess does not permit this claim, which got me thinking that perhaps there is a subtlety to the rules.</p>
  
  <p>FIDE says:</p>
  
  <blockquote>
    <p>9.2<br>
    The game is drawn, upon a correct claim by a player having the move, when the same position for at least the third time (not necessarily by a repetition of moves):</p>
    
    <p>a. is about to appear, if he first writes his move, which cannot be changed, 
    on his scoresheet and declares to the arbiter his intention to make this move, or</p>
    
    <p>b. has just appeared, and the player claiming the draw has the move.</p>
    
    <p>Positions are considered the same if and only if the same player has the move, pieces of the same kind and colour occupy the same squares and the possible moves of all the pieces of both players are the same. Thus positions are not the same if:</p>
    
    <ol>
    <li>at the start of the sequence a pawn could have been captured en passant.</li>
    <li>a king or rook had castling rights, but forfeited these after moving. The castling rights are lost only after the king or rook is moved.</li>
    </ol>
  </blockquote>
  
  <p>It seems that white clearly has the ability to claim a draw by 9.2.a, since 5. Nf3 would definitely repeat the position after 1. Nf3. But my question is really whether 9.2.b applies for white (or perhaps equivalently whether black can claim the draw on move 4 via 9.2.a): Did the starting position "occur" before 1. Ng3? Or does it somehow not count? Are the rules ambiguous?</p>
  
  <p>Obviously this is a silly game, but this kind of "Fool's Draw" might occur in practice when both players want a draw but are not allowed a normal offer (e.g. FIDE world championship 3.8.3b "The players cannot draw a game by agreement before black’s 30th move.").</p>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2019-09-17T08:38:10.593Z
Comments.Text: So, the actual question here would be "Can Black claim a draw after White plays ```4.Ng1```? Am I right?
Comments.UserDisplayName: David
Tags: <rules><draw><threefold-repetition><claim-draw>
Title: Rules: Is this position a draw?
ThreadText: # Rules: Is this position a draw?
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2018-12-08)
  
  Is this position a draw?
  
  ```
  [FEN ""]
  1. Nf3 Nf6 2. Ng1 Ng8 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Ng1 Ng8
  
  ```
  
  I don't mean to ask the age-old question "Is chess a draw?"; four moves have been played here, returning to the starting position. Since the start position has appeared three times, it seems that white can claim a draw by threefold repetition. However, lichess does not permit this claim, which got me thinking that perhaps there is a subtlety to the rules.
  
  FIDE says:
  
  > 9.2  
  > The game is drawn, upon a correct claim by a player having the move, when the same position for at least the third time (not necessarily by a repetition of moves):
  >
  > a. is about to appear, if he first writes his move, which cannot be changed,
  > on his scoresheet and declares to the arbiter his intention to make this move, or
  >
  > b. has just appeared, and the player claiming the draw has the move.
  >
  > Positions are considered the same if and only if the same player has the move, pieces of the same kind and colour occupy the same squares and the possible moves of all the pieces of both players are the same. Thus positions are not the same if:
  >
  > 1. at the start of the sequence a pawn could have been captured en passant.
  > 2. a king or rook had castling rights, but forfeited these after moving. The castling rights are lost only after the king or rook is moved.
  
  It seems that white clearly has the ability to claim a draw by 9.2.a, since 5. Nf3 would definitely repeat the position after 1. Nf3. But my question is really whether 9.2.b applies for white (or perhaps equivalently whether black can claim the draw on move 4 via 9.2.a): Did the starting position "occur" before 1. Ng3? Or does it somehow not count? Are the rules ambiguous?
  
  Obviously this is a silly game, but this kind of "Fool's Draw" might occur in practice when both players want a draw but are not allowed a normal offer (e.g. FIDE world championship 3.8.3b "The players cannot draw a game by agreement before black’s 30th move.").
  
  **Tags:** rules, draw, threefold-repetition, claim-draw
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_1**: So, the actual question here would be "Can Black claim a draw after White plays ```4.Ng1```? Am I right?  
  
  ---
  
  ## 3 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_4 on 2018-12-09. Score: 16 | Accepted answer
  
  This is a better question than it seems at first glance.
  
  Intuitively it seems possible to claim a draw, since the position appears to have occurred three times.
  
  **However,** according to a strict reading of the rules, the position after 4...Ng8 has appeared only for the second time. The relevant clauses are 9.2:
  
  > [...] Positions are considered the same if and only if the same player
  > **has the move**, [...]
  
  and 1.1 about the start of the game:
  
  > The player with the white pieces commences the game. A player is said
  > to ‘**have the move**’, when his opponent’s move has been ‘made’.
  
  In the starting position, white does not "have the move" since black did not make a prior move, white merely commences the game. Therefore, the positions before 1. Nf3 and after 4...Ng8 are **not** the same, and a draw cannot be claimed yet.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_0**: Very satisfying answer! The rules do seem to use "have the move" as a formal notion.  
  > **username_5**: https://chess.stackexchange.com/a/19774/14079 Please see my similar answer to that question.  
  > **username_6**: "According to a strict reading of the rules", sure. But in reality, I don't think most arbiters would go for this. Under this interpretation, White cannot adjust the pieces at the start of the game ("Only the player having the move may adjust one or more pieces on their squares") - but that doesn't matter much, because touch move can't apply anyway ("if the player having the move touches..."). And the glossary entry for "move" says "having the move refers to the player’s right to play next."  
  > **username_7**: But white _can_ claim a draw if he first writes down 5.Nf3 without making it, then claims.  
  > **username_4**: But black can't claim a draw writing down 4...Ng8 before playing it, which was the point of the question. Of course white can make a valid claim by intending 5.Nf3.  
  > **username_8**: The only arts. that specify a player must move only his own pieces are arts. 4.3 and 4.4. Each applies only to the player having the move, so by the same token White can start the game with e.g. Pg7-g5.  
  > **username_9**: As an (NA level) arbiter, I assure you we love to discuss this question in our seminars, and the first poor git that suggests "So, why doesn't the FIDE simply say that White has the move in the opening position?!" will always be ceremonially sacrificed to Cthulhu :-)  
  > **username_10**: Would the rules allow an arbiter to inform the players that proper sportsmanship requires a bona fide effort to play an actual game, and that failure to do so would represent sufficiently poor sportsmanship that he would score the game as a double forfeit?  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_2 on 2021-07-27. Score: 5
  
  It's a repetition draw, claimable by either side (black on the previous move).
  
  If you believe that "commencing the game" is something different from "having and playing the move" then please explain from the FIDE laws what you do when you "commence the game". How about standing up and proclaiming loudly "the game has commenced" and sitting dow again? Obviously not. "Commencing the game" is only different from "having and playing the move" in that it also indicates it's the first time that white has the move in the game - which is purely informational without legal implications.
  
  The initial game position is as much a position as any other one and after 4. ... Ng8 it appears for the third time with the same player on move. So it is subject to a (pre-)claimed draw. White need not announce 5.Nf3 as the required double repetition was already completed.
  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_3 on 2019-09-17. Score: 3
  
  This is a funny situation - in a FIDE tournament, it depends on whether you're talking about White or Black. To claim a draw in FIDE tournaments the procedure is as follows:
  
  1) Write down the move you are planning to make that will result in a three-fold repetition. Do NOT make the move.
  
  2) Call over the arbiter and explain what move you're about to make, and how this results in a three-fold. The arbiter checks it over and declares the game drawn.
  
  So after 4.Ng1, if Black wanted to claim a draw he'd write 4...Ng8 down and call the arbiter over. The game would then be declared drawn. If he actually made the move 4...Ng8 and tried calling the aribter over, he could not claim a draw since it's not his turn. It's extremely weird, but this is how it works. So assuming the diagram position has been reached in a real game, Black could not claim a draw there (it's not his turn).
  
  Meanwhile, White could claim a draw in the position you posted. Not because of the fact that the position has been repeated three times, but because if he moves 5.Nf3, the resulting position has been seen three times. So he'd write down 5.Nf3, call the aribter over, etc.
  
  I've known people who have missed out on a draw and ending up losing their game because they weren't aware of this technicality in FIDE tournaments. It's borderline ridiculous but those are the rules.
  
  
  ---
  
  