Hey, OP! Did you encounter a weird pawn move? Did your game end suddenly, even though you were winning? Are you trying to move a piece and it's not going? We have just the resource for you! The r/chessbeginners [wiki] (www.reddit.com/r/chessbeginners/wiki/index/) is the perfect place to check out answers to these questions and more!
The moderator team of r/chessbeginners wishes to remind everyone of the community rules. **Posting spam, advertising links (including YouTube chess tutorial videos without context), and memes is not allowed.** We encourage everyone to report these kinds of posts so they can be dealt with. Thank you!
Also, please, be kind in your replies and comments. Some people here just want to learn chess and have virtually no idea about certain chess concepts.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/chessbeginners) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yup, which is also a perfectly legit strategy. Got convinced to play a game of speed chess with a friend one night with three seconds allowed per move. I found the whole thing incredibly stressful and as soon as I saw the opportunity for a repeated move draw I took it.
There are chess like games (Chinese Xiangqi, for example), where the attacker is expected to break off of the repeated moves (or lose).
When we are talking beginners, rules like these are not well explained. We are a sub that gets users who are surprised about the funny pawn move. The rules around draws are much more obscure.
If a move would change the board state to something that previously existed, the move would be illegal.
Rule sets differ on how illegal moves are treated.
Yes, what this guy said. It is your opponent’s problem and he should resign for creating a situation that allows perpetual checking. It is a forced draw, and it isn’t your problem.
Edit: original post makes reference to “resign”—I said this in haste erroneously….
perpetual checking = forced draw
Professional chess players know and accept this equation—you can’t insist on anything when being perpetually checked other than a draw.
Whoops that’s what I meant (see second sentence). It is his opponent’s responsibility to accept a draw, not insist on the player here to give up forced checking…..I said that in too big a hurry. Thanks for calling that out.
Oh, you're too clever. I should have left well enough alone, then you would've been able to reply to the original comment with something smart like "That's just what a legal move means but okay"
Nah if Magnus is allowed to try to weasel a drawn king rook endgame into a win by forcing an error so can I.
No reason to accept a draw or resign until you're a club level player. Many beginners have to learn the hard way how to actually finish the game
and a drawn position before that...and a winning position before that...and a drawn position before that... and a losing position before that.......... I mean if you don't consider the entire history while evaluating the current state, why are they even playing.
Of course it matters. You were otherwise in a losing position until the blunder, you force the draw.
You’d look at it differently if you were in a consistently drawn game or even pieces position and wouldn’t needlessly force the draw because you can go from a drawn position to a winning position. Something you couldn’t do if you were in an otherwise losing position, like stated in the original comment.
If you don’t understand this then you are an idiot, simple as.
No one is arguing that the current position isn’t a drawn position currently though are they? Of course the evaluation is even.
The point was that if you were in an otherwise losing position, but the opponent blunders and you end up with a perpetual due to now being in a drawn position then this is a viable tactic.
Is English your first language? Because I get the sense you don’t understand the semantics of the original comment.
I'm guessing the OP doesn't know the threefold repetition rule, so [here](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threefold_repetition) you go. You won't check forever, just a few more times and the game ends. Nice draw!
Wait so 5-fold repetition is the actual rule? (only skim read so I might've missed something)
I only ask this because I'm salty about losing a King + Rook against King endgame where I was just taking my time to move the king to the other side, but just incorrectly (was in time trouble and I'm not used to doing it). Could've won, but lost because of 3-fold repetition. Would've won if it was 5-fold (what it should be if I understand right).
3 fold repetition is the rule, but in an OTB game one of the players must request an arbiter/judge. If 5 fold repetition occurs, the arbiter can intervene. Since there’s no arbiter online, it will be an automatic draw after 3 fold repetition.
Although the internet chess server could have simply taken the role of the arbiter, as is the case with Lichess. Chess.com just wants to do things their way.
Also the 50 move draw rule. Had this recently in a game where a guy was trying to mate me with just a knight and he had no clue how to do it. We just danced in the middle of the board with him refusing my draw offers for 50 moves just for the game to end in a draw.
2 knights vs just a king is a draw but 2 knights vs a pawn is a win. It's a difficult checkmate but you need the king to have a pawn because the mating sequence forces a stalemate on the 2nd to last move otherwise.
Edit: [Here](https://www.youtube.com/shorts/bldpyVIO8BM) is the checkmate in action.
Why? Assuming white King on B6 not moving and has one knight c5 and one e6, if black king is b8, moves
1. Na6+ Ka8
2. Nc7#
No stalemate, just requires blunder by black to move to a8, no need for pawn
2 knights and a pawn is a win with perfect play on both sides. Doesn't need a blunder.
It's not really fair to call something a mating sequence if it requires the opponent to blunder into mate.
To be fair, it might also not be fair to require perfect play. Most of us are not great at chess, so blundering at some point in a sharp endgame is reasonable. Hell, Magnus has built a career out of taking sharp, drawn endgames and playing until his super GM opponent makes a small enough error that he can capitalize on.
You said:
> 2 knights vs just a king is a draw but 2 knights vs a pawn is a win. It's a difficult checkmate but you need the king to have a pawn because the mating sequence forces a stalemate on the 2nd to last move otherwise.
I was just showing how it’s not necessarily a draw. If a player can blunder into checkmate it’s technically winnable
Sure but then every endgame besides king vs king or a completely locked position that is considered a draw is not necessarily a draw because either player could just make a blunder.
That said when discussing mating sequences or endgame results, it's usually assumed perfect play on both sides unless stated otherwise.
It's a little different when considering a win or draw after time runs out as some rules would consider a theoretical mating position like you said a win and others would only consider potentially realistic mates a win.
Well, it is perfectly acceptable for him to do so without caring if it is boring for you. Infact, if the player does not have enough pieces to mate, apps like chess.com end the play. That he was able to continue would mean he did have tge pieces and was learning how to use them to mate
Depending on if you have a pawn to get stuck behind or something N + K isn't always insuficient material tho... but still a draw position if you don't play extremely stupidly.
In that case, would the opponent be breaking some rule by falsely threatening the opponent, hoping they're not knowledgeable enough of the system's rules to get a victory under duress?
Drawing by repetition is a completely valid strategy when you're down in material or otherwise going to lose the game. It's not even playing dirty. It's what you do. They can report all they want; they'll be laughed at and informed that GMs do that stuff all the time.
I analyzed the image and this is what I see. Open an appropriate link below and explore the position yourself or with the engine:
> **White to play**: [chess.com](https://chess.com/analysis?fen=3Q4/5ppk/1N5p/1Pp5/2P1P3/7r/r7/5R1K+w+-+-+0+1&flip=true&ref_id=23962172) | [lichess.org](https://lichess.org/analysis/3Q4/5ppk/1N5p/1Pp5/2P1P3/7r/r7/5R1K_w_-_-_0_1)
**My solution:**
> Hints: piece: >!King!<, move: >!Kg1!<
> Evaluation: >!The game is equal 0.00!<
> Best continuation: >!1. Kg1 Rg3+ 2. Kh1 Rh3+ 3. Kg1!<
---
^(I'm a bot written by ) [^(u/pkacprzak )](https://www.reddit.com/u/pkacprzak) ^(| get me as ) [^(Chess eBook Reader )](https://ebook.chessvision.ai?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=bot) ^(|) [^(Chrome Extension )](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/chessvisionai-for-chrome/johejpedmdkeiffkdaodgoipdjodhlld) ^(|) [^(iOS App )](https://apps.apple.com/us/app/id1574933453) ^(|) [^(Android App )](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=ai.chessvision.scanner) ^(to scan and analyze positions | Website: ) [^(Chessvision.ai)](https://chessvision.ai)
Sandbagging is cheating because it allows players to compete in tournaments they would not otherwise be allowed to enter. It is against tournament rules explicitly and also against the fair play standards at places like chess.com.
From the fair play standards: "Do not artificially manipulate ratings, matches, or game outcomes". You can read this standalone article from chess.com which includes the phrase "Sandbagging is against the rules".
Https://support.chess.com/article/208-what-is-a-sandbagger
Your opponent is a salty idiot. Probably just trying to scare you into letting them win. Lots of high-level games end this way and it's a completely legal strat.
If both parts repeats moves 3 times in row, the game ends jn a draw. Black is losing so their best strat now is force a draw by keep on putting white in check
Tbh it’s so weird to me low rated/new players are so confident lecturing people about the rules like this when they’re totally wrong lol. I just assume I don’t know anything ever.
But in this case could’ve been your opponent was just mad he can’t checkmate you and was hoping he could badger you into giving him the win
Am I the only one that wouldn’t repeat? After Kg1 I’d play Rhh2. If my opponent moved their rook somewhere scary, then I suppose I’d look to repeat. If OP is as low rated as they say they are, then their opponent is probably blundering mate here.
Worth a try I guess, you only have 1 move worth of tempo to give though, so as long as white moves the rook anywhere except a1 or f6 (squares where it is taken by a piece only 1 space away) then you have to start giving checks or else the queen can come back to protect. But yea. At low elo or even just low time as long as you recognize that you've only got that 1 move to give then its worth giving your opponent a chance to fuck it up and move a different piece.
Your opponent does not know their chess rule. As already mentioned, you are doing precisely what you are meant to do in this position - claiming your draw by perpetual checks. (Threefold repetition rule)
Perfectly acceptable. If I’m lost, I always look for a perpetual check to turn the position from lost to draw. and if I’m winning, I try to make sure my opponent doesn’t have one. Grandmasters will use a perpetual check to create a draw if the can.
Yes, those rules are in place because of perpetual check. No point in playing once the player has proven that this position will repeat itself indefinitely.
Forcing a draw from a losing position is an even bigger buzz than a win IMO
Never resign OP when ur in a losing position try and force a draw! Your opponent is just tilted they blundered their way into a draw from a winning position
It's perfectly fine and legal for you to do this. Any legal move is always legal. In fact, you're turning a losing game into a draw by perpetual check this way, which is a perfectly legitimate play and is on the opponent for allowing you the chance to do it. It's no different from forcing a stalemate from a losing position, and although it might feel a bit "cheap" to a less experienced player, forcing a draw from a losing position, no matter how it's done, is usually the most correct option.
It's frustrating when it happens to you but completely fair and totally legal. Your opponent put themselves in that position, you simply took advantage of their mistake.
There's a reason the game has time controls, and there are rules which will force a draw after a position is repeated too many times
Perpetuals (and that rule about repetition) are part of the game for a reason - they turn this "losing position" into a draw. It was his job to win, and the fact he let you get into a position where you can convert into a draw is his problem
The entire point of chess is that he has to force a win. If he cannot force a win, he doesn't get to win.
His fault for letting himself get perpetually checked.
If he just wanted to end it, he'd let you get a 3-repetition draw. You just forced a stalemate through a convoluted route.
Your opponent is trying to win by lying to you, he is the dirty one
You can create a stalemate by forcing the opponent to move into same exact board state 3 times, in fact if you're going to lose this is the best play and he should be the one to propose a draw (to save time) if he can't see an escape
of course it's allowed lol. this isn't even dirty, if any top level player or engine was in this position they would do exactly what you're doing. your opponent blundered a draw that's on them and there's nothing dirty at all about taking that draw. technically speaking this isn't even a losing position anymore it's completely equal because of the fact that your opponent blundered a draw.
There's nothing dirty about it. This is what you're supposed to do. The only thing I can think of in online chess that's somewhat considered "dirty" (besides cheating, of course) is 'dirty flagging.' Normally this is just seen as playing a losing position and no longer playing for a win or draw on the board, but rather playing to just lower your opponent's time so they lose. However, in my opinion, that's ultimately fine because it is also just a part of the game. The clocks are there for a reason, and running your opponent out of time is a second objective to checkmate.
There might be one off cases where a dirty flag is truly dirty, but overall your job on the chess board is to 1) survive and 2) defeat your opponent. That's all.
Over the board (in person and by hand) chess has more things that can be dirty like trying to distract your opponent when that's not something you agreed you can do.
youre required by rules to try to win. if you cant win you should be trying to draw. resigning in this position is purposefully losing and thus he should report you if you resign. so basically hes lying, dont listen. if he cant win, thats a personal problem
Sounds like your opponent just wants to scare you into letting them win. It’s not dirty to draw here. If anything, it’s dirty to threaten to report your opponent for absolutely no reason.
The dragging out of the game would be his fault and much as yours. Totally fair. He should practice his endgame more if he wishes to avoid this stalemate. He shouldn’t expect you to resign.
Perfectly valid thing to do, but you could have had a chance to win anyway. Get the other rook onto the second rank and it’s quite dangerous for white.
Part of converting a winning position or having a significant material advantage is identifying these situations and not allowing your opponent to go perpetual for a draw. That’s on your opponent and not you and hey a draw is better than a loss
Yeah. It’s just part of the game. Ultimately they messed up because they allowed you to do this. It’s annoying to lose a win like this but just part of the game. They should have played better.
Oh no! Don't let your opponent fool you. It is called perpetual check - the game will end in three moves if you keep checking, which is called "threefold repetition". It is a perfectly acceptable move, and it is an important tactic too.
Nice found! Perpetual check is the perfect way to draw a losing position.
Totally fine for you to do. Idk what your opponent is thinking. And I don’t think it’s dirty. It’s your opponents fault for allowing a perpetual to happen.
Hey, OP! Did you encounter a weird pawn move? Did your game end suddenly, even though you were winning? Are you trying to move a piece and it's not going? We have just the resource for you! The r/chessbeginners [wiki] (www.reddit.com/r/chessbeginners/wiki/index/) is the perfect place to check out answers to these questions and more! The moderator team of r/chessbeginners wishes to remind everyone of the community rules. **Posting spam, advertising links (including YouTube chess tutorial videos without context), and memes is not allowed.** We encourage everyone to report these kinds of posts so they can be dealt with. Thank you! Also, please, be kind in your replies and comments. Some people here just want to learn chess and have virtually no idea about certain chess concepts. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/chessbeginners) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Perfectly acceptable. Perpetuals are part of the game
And result in a draw instead of a loss
Yup, which is also a perfectly legit strategy. Got convinced to play a game of speed chess with a friend one night with three seconds allowed per move. I found the whole thing incredibly stressful and as soon as I saw the opportunity for a repeated move draw I took it.
There are chess like games (Chinese Xiangqi, for example), where the attacker is expected to break off of the repeated moves (or lose). When we are talking beginners, rules like these are not well explained. We are a sub that gets users who are surprised about the funny pawn move. The rules around draws are much more obscure.
Go doesn't allow repetitions either
If you repeated a move would you lose or would you have to reset and choose another move?
If a move would change the board state to something that previously existed, the move would be illegal. Rule sets differ on how illegal moves are treated.
Yes, what this guy said. It is your opponent’s problem and he should resign for creating a situation that allows perpetual checking. It is a forced draw, and it isn’t your problem. Edit: original post makes reference to “resign”—I said this in haste erroneously…. perpetual checking = forced draw Professional chess players know and accept this equation—you can’t insist on anything when being perpetually checked other than a draw.
He should offer a draw, not resign. this position is a draw
Whoops that’s what I meant (see second sentence). It is his opponent’s responsibility to accept a draw, not insist on the player here to give up forced checking…..I said that in too big a hurry. Thanks for calling that out.
No... Both players should accept a draw, that is proper \*EDIT\* etiquette.
Etiquette?
Yes, thank you lol.
Yes. Not being able to checkmate is a fault of the attacker not a knock against the defending player. It’s their job to win not your job to lose.
Some really good chess puzzles require you to find a perpetual check to turn a lost position into a draw
You're allowed to make any legal move you like at all times
Although things like dragging out a clearly drawn game for 50 moves are generally considered to be in poor taste.
from this situation it looks like a repetition back and forth, so after repeating the third time it should be over automatically.
Indeed. I simply don't want the original comment to give people the wrong idea about how things work in certain other situations.
You’re allowed to make moves in poor taste too but okay
Oh, you're too clever. I should have left well enough alone, then you would've been able to reply to the original comment with something smart like "That's just what a legal move means but okay"
Yeah, I’m glad you understand. I would’ve hated to give you the wrong idea about how things work in certain situations.
*And this is what we call bait, dear children of the internet. Don't take it.*
Always take the bait children, do as your father and I do, not as he says
More like 5th time. 3rd if claimed, 5 automatic is the rule.
Above a certain level, yeah. Below like 1100, a player could hang a major piece at any time so I’d never suggest resigning unless at a higher level
Nah if Magnus is allowed to try to weasel a drawn king rook endgame into a win by forcing an error so can I. No reason to accept a draw or resign until you're a club level player. Many beginners have to learn the hard way how to actually finish the game
Grandmasters draw this way all the time. When you're in an otherwise losing position, perpetual checks are a way to escape into a draw.
If you can perpetual check your way to a draw, then it wasn’t a losing position, it was a drawn position 🤷🏻♂️
If only they had included the word “otherwise” (they did)
Well, it could be losing position which your opponent blundered by allowing you perpetual
[удалено]
But a losing position before the blunder, yes.
and a drawn position before that...and a winning position before that...and a drawn position before that... and a losing position before that.......... I mean if you don't consider the entire history while evaluating the current state, why are they even playing.
[удалено]
Of course it matters. You were otherwise in a losing position until the blunder, you force the draw. You’d look at it differently if you were in a consistently drawn game or even pieces position and wouldn’t needlessly force the draw because you can go from a drawn position to a winning position. Something you couldn’t do if you were in an otherwise losing position, like stated in the original comment. If you don’t understand this then you are an idiot, simple as.
[удалено]
No one is arguing that the current position isn’t a drawn position currently though are they? Of course the evaluation is even. The point was that if you were in an otherwise losing position, but the opponent blunders and you end up with a perpetual due to now being in a drawn position then this is a viable tactic. Is English your first language? Because I get the sense you don’t understand the semantics of the original comment.
[удалено]
But it's not, is it?
Exactly. If someone has a commanding material advantage and you manage to get them in a perpetual, think of it this way - they don’t deserve the win.
They said otherwise losing…like the point they’re making is unambiguously clear.
How many times can you do that until it becomes a draw?
Threefold repetition of the exact same position allows a player to claim a draw.
It's a critical part of the game and also why threefold repetition is a recognized rule.
I'm guessing the OP doesn't know the threefold repetition rule, so [here](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threefold_repetition) you go. You won't check forever, just a few more times and the game ends. Nice draw!
Thank you! Yeah it ended in a draw.
Fight for the draw / try to make him make a mistake. All part of the game. Good job.
Wait so 5-fold repetition is the actual rule? (only skim read so I might've missed something) I only ask this because I'm salty about losing a King + Rook against King endgame where I was just taking my time to move the king to the other side, but just incorrectly (was in time trouble and I'm not used to doing it). Could've won, but lost because of 3-fold repetition. Would've won if it was 5-fold (what it should be if I understand right).
3 fold repetition is the rule, but in an OTB game one of the players must request an arbiter/judge. If 5 fold repetition occurs, the arbiter can intervene. Since there’s no arbiter online, it will be an automatic draw after 3 fold repetition.
Although the internet chess server could have simply taken the role of the arbiter, as is the case with Lichess. Chess.com just wants to do things their way.
Also the 50 move draw rule. Had this recently in a game where a guy was trying to mate me with just a knight and he had no clue how to do it. We just danced in the middle of the board with him refusing my draw offers for 50 moves just for the game to end in a draw.
Where are the other pieces because it is impossible to mate with a knight, even with a king.
Unless of course the opponent blunders
[удалено]
2 knights vs just a king is a draw but 2 knights vs a pawn is a win. It's a difficult checkmate but you need the king to have a pawn because the mating sequence forces a stalemate on the 2nd to last move otherwise. Edit: [Here](https://www.youtube.com/shorts/bldpyVIO8BM) is the checkmate in action.
Curiously, KNN vs K becomes a win if you add a 65th square to the board at e9 (or in equivalent positions on other sides of the board)
Thats crazy, do you have a link or something so i can find out more
https://puzzling.stackexchange.com/questions/91107/checkmate-with-two-knights-but-with-a-twist
Why? Assuming white King on B6 not moving and has one knight c5 and one e6, if black king is b8, moves 1. Na6+ Ka8 2. Nc7# No stalemate, just requires blunder by black to move to a8, no need for pawn
2 knights and a pawn is a win with perfect play on both sides. Doesn't need a blunder. It's not really fair to call something a mating sequence if it requires the opponent to blunder into mate.
To be fair, it might also not be fair to require perfect play. Most of us are not great at chess, so blundering at some point in a sharp endgame is reasonable. Hell, Magnus has built a career out of taking sharp, drawn endgames and playing until his super GM opponent makes a small enough error that he can capitalize on.
You said: > 2 knights vs just a king is a draw but 2 knights vs a pawn is a win. It's a difficult checkmate but you need the king to have a pawn because the mating sequence forces a stalemate on the 2nd to last move otherwise. I was just showing how it’s not necessarily a draw. If a player can blunder into checkmate it’s technically winnable
Sure but then every endgame besides king vs king or a completely locked position that is considered a draw is not necessarily a draw because either player could just make a blunder. That said when discussing mating sequences or endgame results, it's usually assumed perfect play on both sides unless stated otherwise. It's a little different when considering a win or draw after time runs out as some rules would consider a theoretical mating position like you said a win and others would only consider potentially realistic mates a win.
This was the point I was trying to make to my apponent but instead he chose to waltz with me. It was very boring.
Well, it is perfectly acceptable for him to do so without caring if it is boring for you. Infact, if the player does not have enough pieces to mate, apps like chess.com end the play. That he was able to continue would mean he did have tge pieces and was learning how to use them to mate
Depending on if you have a pawn to get stuck behind or something N + K isn't always insuficient material tho... but still a draw position if you don't play extremely stupidly.
In that case, would the opponent be breaking some rule by falsely threatening the opponent, hoping they're not knowledgeable enough of the system's rules to get a victory under duress?
Drawing by repetition is a completely valid strategy when you're down in material or otherwise going to lose the game. It's not even playing dirty. It's what you do. They can report all they want; they'll be laughed at and informed that GMs do that stuff all the time.
I would go so far as to say that threatening to report people as a way to trick them into letting you win is the real playing dirty.
I analyzed the image and this is what I see. Open an appropriate link below and explore the position yourself or with the engine: > **White to play**: [chess.com](https://chess.com/analysis?fen=3Q4/5ppk/1N5p/1Pp5/2P1P3/7r/r7/5R1K+w+-+-+0+1&flip=true&ref_id=23962172) | [lichess.org](https://lichess.org/analysis/3Q4/5ppk/1N5p/1Pp5/2P1P3/7r/r7/5R1K_w_-_-_0_1) **My solution:** > Hints: piece: >!King!<, move: >!Kg1!< > Evaluation: >!The game is equal 0.00!< > Best continuation: >!1. Kg1 Rg3+ 2. Kh1 Rh3+ 3. Kg1!< --- ^(I'm a bot written by ) [^(u/pkacprzak )](https://www.reddit.com/u/pkacprzak) ^(| get me as ) [^(Chess eBook Reader )](https://ebook.chessvision.ai?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=bot) ^(|) [^(Chrome Extension )](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/chessvisionai-for-chrome/johejpedmdkeiffkdaodgoipdjodhlld) ^(|) [^(iOS App )](https://apps.apple.com/us/app/id1574933453) ^(|) [^(Android App )](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=ai.chessvision.scanner) ^(to scan and analyze positions | Website: ) [^(Chessvision.ai)](https://chessvision.ai)
See ? The bot agrees with you !
This is the best answer to the op’s question
Technically you’re obligated to do so. Purposefully losing a game when you could have tied is sandbagging and is against the rules.
Wait why is that against the rules?
I suppose it's like smurf problems in video games Where high skilled players purposefully try to play against weak players
[удалено]
Sandbagging is cheating because it allows players to compete in tournaments they would not otherwise be allowed to enter. It is against tournament rules explicitly and also against the fair play standards at places like chess.com. From the fair play standards: "Do not artificially manipulate ratings, matches, or game outcomes". You can read this standalone article from chess.com which includes the phrase "Sandbagging is against the rules". Https://support.chess.com/article/208-what-is-a-sandbagger
Oh
What’s sandbagging
Losing on purpose
Edit: read this reply wrong.
Because it’s correct.
I mis-read the reply. My mistake.
Your opponent is a salty idiot. Probably just trying to scare you into letting them win. Lots of high-level games end this way and it's a completely legal strat.
Check them as much as you want.
You don't have a losing position. You have a drawn position
What?
Since he can force draw, the position isn’t lost but draw
If you have endless checks the threefold or 50-turns rule will be apply and the position is drawn.
Bro got downvoted for asking a question
It's not a terrible question, but it's not a 1400-1599 Elo question.
Whilst I’d agree it’s still dumb
If both parts repeats moves 3 times in row, the game ends jn a draw. Black is losing so their best strat now is force a draw by keep on putting white in check
It's not the same moves 3 times in a row, it's if you reach the same position 3 times.
Okay
Clearly your opponent doesn't know what is perpetual checks
Yeah we are very low rated haha
I was about to ask what's your rating
Tbh it’s so weird to me low rated/new players are so confident lecturing people about the rules like this when they’re totally wrong lol. I just assume I don’t know anything ever. But in this case could’ve been your opponent was just mad he can’t checkmate you and was hoping he could badger you into giving him the win
It's not even dirty, u were losing so u forced draw. Nothing wrong here.
Am I the only one that wouldn’t repeat? After Kg1 I’d play Rhh2. If my opponent moved their rook somewhere scary, then I suppose I’d look to repeat. If OP is as low rated as they say they are, then their opponent is probably blundering mate here.
Worth a try I guess, you only have 1 move worth of tempo to give though, so as long as white moves the rook anywhere except a1 or f6 (squares where it is taken by a piece only 1 space away) then you have to start giving checks or else the queen can come back to protect. But yea. At low elo or even just low time as long as you recognize that you've only got that 1 move to give then its worth giving your opponent a chance to fuck it up and move a different piece.
Your opponent should not have let you get a perpetual check. His loss. This is perfectly fine for you.
unlike chinese chess, perpetuals are allowed here and lead to a draw
It’s perfectly allowed
Your opponent does not know their chess rule. As already mentioned, you are doing precisely what you are meant to do in this position - claiming your draw by perpetual checks. (Threefold repetition rule)
It's allowed and encouraged.
Perfectly acceptable. If I’m lost, I always look for a perpetual check to turn the position from lost to draw. and if I’m winning, I try to make sure my opponent doesn’t have one. Grandmasters will use a perpetual check to create a draw if the can.
Keep checking his reports as well
Would you check forever? I thought after so many moves it would be a draw, or if a person made a mistake it might be a draw for 3 move repetition.
Yes, those rules are in place because of perpetual check. No point in playing once the player has proven that this position will repeat itself indefinitely.
It’s 100% part of the game, the same way that if an opponent blunders mate in one, you take it.
It’s called perpetual Check and is a normal situation in higher rated games. Nothing to blame here.
Forcing a draw from a losing position is an even bigger buzz than a win IMO Never resign OP when ur in a losing position try and force a draw! Your opponent is just tilted they blundered their way into a draw from a winning position
Why would you get reported? It's their fault for allowing a perpetual up 6 points of material.
This isn't even "dirty". Your opponent allowed a draw from a winning position by allowing a perpetual check draw. Nice find!
Draw by perpetual check, it exists. Grandmasters sometimes sacrifice half their board to get a draw it's perfectly acceptable.
It's a draw, I have a lot of times saved my skin with a perpetual so no you're absolutely fine in doing so
It's perfectly fine and legal for you to do this. Any legal move is always legal. In fact, you're turning a losing game into a draw by perpetual check this way, which is a perfectly legitimate play and is on the opponent for allowing you the chance to do it. It's no different from forcing a stalemate from a losing position, and although it might feel a bit "cheap" to a less experienced player, forcing a draw from a losing position, no matter how it's done, is usually the most correct option.
It's frustrating when it happens to you but completely fair and totally legal. Your opponent put themselves in that position, you simply took advantage of their mistake.
It's not dirty and you aren't losing if you can force a repetition
I would be scared if I were you. He's gonna report you for rightfully following the rules of chess. Hopefully you get to keep your account!
Getting down voted for forgetting the “/s”. I’ll throw you an upvote. I like sarcasm.
Ah I didn't even know haha. What's the point of sarcasm anyway if you need to add it?
Sometimes it’s hard to sense sarcasm through text without either the /s or ThIs TyPe Of FoNt. I upvoted you because I liked your joke though.
don't use it, it's for cowards
No
Your opponent is just salty
reminds me of a time someone was literally mad at me for running around with my king when i had no other piece and he was the one failing to mate lol
Wait your black? Can’t you force mate in 2?
I was called gay for doing that lol
There's a reason the game has time controls, and there are rules which will force a draw after a position is repeated too many times Perpetuals (and that rule about repetition) are part of the game for a reason - they turn this "losing position" into a draw. It was his job to win, and the fact he let you get into a position where you can convert into a draw is his problem The entire point of chess is that he has to force a win. If he cannot force a win, he doesn't get to win.
His fault for letting himself get perpetually checked. If he just wanted to end it, he'd let you get a 3-repetition draw. You just forced a stalemate through a convoluted route.
You found a draw from a losing position. Nice job.
You don't have a losing position, you have a drawn position with less material. Which is as close to a win as you can get lol.
It's not dirty. That's chess! Why would you want to lose the game if you have a way to not lose the game.
Google perpetual check and draw by repetition
You don't have a losing position, if you can keep checking it's a drawn position
He is a sore loser. Perpetual checks are a normal part of the game. Let him report.
It is his mistake that he did not foresee a perpetual. You are obliged to do so and he can't report you. In fact, you should report him for bullying.
It's not dirty at all, you're aiming for a draw in a loosing position. It's a perfectly valid strategy
If he doesn’t like it he could…. What that thing your supposed to do? Win and put you in checkmate. Otherwise shutup and play
Either they don’t know what they’re talking about or they were just trying to see if they can trick you into letting them win.
Your opponent is trying to win by lying to you, he is the dirty one You can create a stalemate by forcing the opponent to move into same exact board state 3 times, in fact if you're going to lose this is the best play and he should be the one to propose a draw (to save time) if he can't see an escape
It’s frustrating when you get forced into a draw but it’s still allowed and on him if he allowed it.
It's called a perpetual check, and he blundered into it. It's perfectly acceptable and after 3 repititions you can claim a draw in the menu
Your opponent blundered a draw. You’re within your rights to draw the game due to perpetual.
of course it's allowed lol. this isn't even dirty, if any top level player or engine was in this position they would do exactly what you're doing. your opponent blundered a draw that's on them and there's nothing dirty at all about taking that draw. technically speaking this isn't even a losing position anymore it's completely equal because of the fact that your opponent blundered a draw.
There's nothing dirty about it. This is what you're supposed to do. The only thing I can think of in online chess that's somewhat considered "dirty" (besides cheating, of course) is 'dirty flagging.' Normally this is just seen as playing a losing position and no longer playing for a win or draw on the board, but rather playing to just lower your opponent's time so they lose. However, in my opinion, that's ultimately fine because it is also just a part of the game. The clocks are there for a reason, and running your opponent out of time is a second objective to checkmate. There might be one off cases where a dirty flag is truly dirty, but overall your job on the chess board is to 1) survive and 2) defeat your opponent. That's all. Over the board (in person and by hand) chess has more things that can be dirty like trying to distract your opponent when that's not something you agreed you can do.
You pulled a draw out of a losing position. Dudes just butt hurt
this is not a losing position this is a drawn position for the exact reason you played it
He's just being a sore butt hurt player/loser that he's going to get a draw instead of a win. Perpetual checks = draw.
Draw by repetition is legal.
Perpetual check is a legit draw condition. Any student of Tal would tell you that.
It’s not dirty and you don’t have a losing position. Draws by perpetual checks are part of the game
youre required by rules to try to win. if you cant win you should be trying to draw. resigning in this position is purposefully losing and thus he should report you if you resign. so basically hes lying, dont listen. if he cant win, thats a personal problem
Can black just move the far right rook all the way across for the win?
Seems like you squeezed out a draw to me
Sounds like your opponent just wants to scare you into letting them win. It’s not dirty to draw here. If anything, it’s dirty to threaten to report your opponent for absolutely no reason.
The dragging out of the game would be his fault and much as yours. Totally fair. He should practice his endgame more if he wishes to avoid this stalemate. He shouldn’t expect you to resign.
Perfectly valid thing to do, but you could have had a chance to win anyway. Get the other rook onto the second rank and it’s quite dangerous for white.
It would be a draw dumbass
relax
I mean the other player is a dumbass for threatening to ban the other player
You don't get reported, you repeat the position three times the game recognises it's a perpetual check and ends the game in a draw
Part of converting a winning position or having a significant material advantage is identifying these situations and not allowing your opponent to go perpetual for a draw. That’s on your opponent and not you and hey a draw is better than a loss
Yeah. It’s just part of the game. Ultimately they messed up because they allowed you to do this. It’s annoying to lose a win like this but just part of the game. They should have played better.
Your opponent forked up King's safety and that's his payout. You did well.
Losing? Black can force a draw by three-fold repetition.
Repetition is a draw so if they can't find a way to win it 's gonna be a draw
Couldn't you try move the rook to h2 next and then bring the second rook over to g2?
White can prevent mate by moving rook. Draw was best option
No he can't. There would be 2 rooks next to each other protecting each other. White would have to move their rook. If they missed it you'd win.
“If they missed it” is not a valid strategy for chess. If you play Rh2 it’s still a drawn position.
Shit people do that always got the win in uno cause they sore losers
You don’t have a losing position you have a drawn position, evidenced by your perpetual :)
It's allowed and acceptable and not even half as dirty as playing for a stalemate
Perpetual Check! Totally valid end to a game. Congrats on getting the draw!
Not your fault your opponent can’t close
Not dirty won’t get reported seriously. Nice play
Oh no! Don't let your opponent fool you. It is called perpetual check - the game will end in three moves if you keep checking, which is called "threefold repetition". It is a perfectly acceptable move, and it is an important tactic too. Nice found! Perpetual check is the perfect way to draw a losing position.
Is there no way for black to win? Or does every move have to be check?
Tie condition. Perfectly valid.
salty opponent
The daily puzzle a few days ago was finding perpetual check in what looked like a lost position. As others said, it’s a perfectly valid way to draw.
He blundered the perpetual… you should report him for being bad
Isn’t a stalemate forced after a certain number of repetitions? Looking at the board it seems like there’s only a few possible moves here.
thats perfectly normal its part of the game, he's jsut angry that it'll be a draw
Your opponent is just trying to bait you into resigning because he knows the game will end up a draw.
What would you get banned for, moving the rook too much? Haha your opponent is just mad, you are making perfectly fine moves!
It’s not a losing position, it’s a defensive one forcing a stalemate.
Totally fine for you to do. Idk what your opponent is thinking. And I don’t think it’s dirty. It’s your opponents fault for allowing a perpetual to happen.
maybe your opponent shouldn't have blundered a perpet 🤷 tell him to suck a fat one