[Retros] Mate with a 3-fold repetition

[Mark Tilford]

On 10/10/07, Franco <peufe at tin.it> wrote:

>

> > Message: 8

> > Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 15:51:54 +0100 (BST)

> > From: A J Mestel <A.J.Mestel at damtp.cam.ac.uk>

> > Subject: Re: [Retros] Is it always right to loose because time?

> > To: andrew at anselan.com, The Retrograde Analysis Mailing List

> > <retros at janko.at>

>

> > What are the rules if someone loses on time and the only conceivable way

> > he could be mated would lead to a 3-fold repetition? Is it assumed that if

> > he is playing badly he would forget to claim a draw? I suppose that's

> > logical.

> >

> >    Jonathan

>

> What you say is not clear for me.

> How can be a 3-fold repetition the only way to give mate?

> The repeated position could'nt just be the mate,

> and if it is'nt the mate it is useless, so it can't be "the only

> conceivable way".

> Did you mean a mate more than 50 moves longer?

>

> Franco

>


Perhaps an intermediate position on the path to the checkmate was
passed previously, and the player didn't notice that he missed a mate.


> _______________________________________________

> Retros mailing list

> Retros at janko.at

> http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/retros

>