Editing Threefold repetition (section)

==History of the rule==
{{Chess diagram
|tright
|Pest vs. Paris
|  |rd|  |  |  |rd|kd|  
|pd|  |bd|  |  |  |pd|pd
|  |nd|pd|  |  |  |  | 
|  |  |nl|  |  |bd|  |  
|  |  |pd|pl|  |  |  |  
|  |  |nl|  |  |  |  |  
|pl|pl|  |  |rl|pl|pl|pl
|rl|  |bl|  |  |  |kl|  
|Position after 19.Nc5, 21.Nc5, 23.Nc5, 25.Nc5 and 27.Nc5
}}
The rule has been variously formulated at different times in chess history. In [[Tim Harding (chess)|Tim Harding]]'s MegaCorr database (a collection of [[correspondence chess]] games), the notes to a game between the cities of [[Pest (city)|Pest]] and [[Paris]] played between 1842 and 1845 state that a sixfold repetition was necessary to claim a draw. The game went: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nxe5 d6 4.Nf3 Nxe4 5.d4 d5 6.Bd3 Bd6 7.0-0 0-0 8.c4 Be6 9.Qc2 f5 10.Qb3 dxc4 11.Qxb7 c6 12.Bxe4 fxe4 13.Ng5 Bf5 14.Nc3 Qd7 15.Qxd7 Nxd7 16.Ngxe4 Bc7 17.Re1 Rab8 18.Re2 Nb6 19.Nc5 ({{em|see diagram}}) 

:'''19... Bd6'''
:'''20. N5e4 Bc7'''
:'''21. Nc5''' (second time) '''Bd6'''
:'''22. N5e4 Bc7'''
:'''23. Nc5''' (third time) '''Bd6'''
:'''24. N5e4 Bc7'''
:'''25. Nc5''' (fourth time) '''Bd6'''
:'''26. N5e4 Bc7'''
:'''27. Nc5''' (fifth time)
and now instead of taking the sixfold repetition draw with 27...Bd6 28.N5e4 Bc7, Paris diverged with 27...Bd3 and went on to lose the game.

The first use of such a rule was in a tournament in London in 1883, but was stated vaguely: "... if a series of moves be repeated three times the opponent can claim a draw." The rules for the first official [[World Chess Championship 1886]] match between [[Wilhelm Steinitz]] and [[Johannes Zukertort]] stated: "... if both players repeat the same series of moves six times in succession, then either player may claim a draw." In two of the games the same position was repeated three times. The rule was modified soon afterward to be based on positions instead of moves, and for three repetitions.<ref>{{Harv|McCrary|2004}}</ref> Draws by this method used to be uncommon.<ref>{{Harvcol|Brace|1977|p=236}}</ref>

The first edition of the FIDE rule from 1928 already defines the threefold repetition rule without considering castling and ''en passant'' capture rights.{{refn|Par 15.C in FIDE Laws of Chess 1928<ref name="FideLawsOfChess1928">{{Cite web|title=AUTHORISED EDITION OF THE OFFICIAL CODE COMPILED BY THE FEDERATION INTERNATIONALE DES ECHECS.|url=http://aekphotography.co.uk/CAA/laws1931.pdf|access-date=9 July 2020|website=CCA - Chess Arbiters’ Association Britain|quote=By recurrence of position when the same position occurs three times in the game, and the same person is Player on each occasion, and if such Player claim the draw before the position is altered by further play, otherwise no claim can be sustained.}}</ref> from [http://aekphotography.co.uk/CAA/laws1931.pdf "1931 - 1st FIDE Laws (BCF version)"] on the Laws historic page<ref name="LawsHistoric">{{Cite web|title=Laws historic|url=http://aekphotography.co.uk/CAA/html/laws_historic.html|access-date=9 July 2020|website=CCA - Chess Arbiters’ Association Britain}}</ref> of the CCA Britain.<ref name="CCAB">{{Cite web|title=CCA Britain|url=http://www.chessarbitersassociation.co.uk|access-date=9 July 2020|website=CCA - Chess Arbiters’ Association Britain}}</ref>}} To additionally consider castling and ''en passant'' capture rights was implicitly introduced in 1975{{refn|Article 12.3 in Fide Laws of Chess 1975<ref name="FideLawsOfChess1975">{{Cite web|title=Fide Laws of Chess 1975, translation|url=http://aekphotography.co.uk/CAA/Laws75.pdf|access-date=9 July 2020|website=CCA - Chess Arbiters’ Association Britain|quote=The position is considered the same if pieces of the same kind and colour occupy the same squares and if the possible moves of all the pieces are the same.}}</ref> from [http://aekphotography.co.uk/CAA/Laws75.pdf "1975"] of the Laws historic page <ref name="LawsHistoric"/> of the CCAB<ref name="CCAB"/>}} and explicitly worded in 1985.{{refn|Article 10.5 (b) in Fide Laws of Chess 1985<ref name="FideLawsOfChess1985">{{Cite web|title=Laws of Chess 1985|url=http://aekphotography.co.uk/CAA/1985_Laws_of_Chess_Final.pdf
|access-date=9 July 2020|website=CCA - Chess Arbiters’ Association Britain|quote=The position is considered the same if pieces of the same kind and colour occupy the same squares and if the possible moves of all the pieces are the same, including the right to castle or to take a pawn en passant.}}</ref> from [http://aekphotography.co.uk/CAA/1985_Laws_of_Chess_Final.pdf "1985"] of the Laws historic page <ref name="LawsHistoric"/> of the CCAB<ref name="CCAB"/>}}  Prior to that, a 1964 FIDE interpretation established the same.<ref>{{Harvcol|Harkness|1967|p=49}}</ref>

{{clear}}

===Pillsbury vs. Burn, 1898===
{{Chess diagram 
|tright
|Pillsbury vs. Burn, 1898
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  
|  |  |  |  |  |pd|kd|  
|  |pd|  |  |  |  |pd|  
|pd|  |  |  |pd|  |  |pd
|pl|  |  |  |  |  |  |pl
|  |pl|  |  |qd|pl|pl|  
|  |  |ql|  |  |  |kl|  
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  
|Position after 42...Qe3, 46...Kg7 and 50...Kg7
}}
In this 1898 Vienna tournament game<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1035959 |title=Pillsbury vs. Burn, 1898 |publisher=Chessgames.com |access-date=2020-07-03}}</ref> between [[Harry Pillsbury]] and [[Amos Burn]], the same position occurred three times, but no draw could be claimed under the rules at the time. The tournament was played under the rules of [[Paul Rudolf von Bilguer|Bilguer's]] ''[[Handbuch des Schachspiels]]'' (1843, with later editions), in which the three-fold rule was stated as the repetition of moves or a sequence of moves, not a position. After 42...Qe3 ({{em|see diagram}}), the game continued:

:'''43. Qb2 Kh6'''
:'''44. Qc2 Kh7'''
:'''45. Qb2 Kg8'''
:'''46. Qc2 Kg7''' (second time)
:'''47. Qb2 Kh7'''
:'''48. Qc2 Kh6'''
:'''49. Qb2 Kh7'''
:'''50. Qc2 Kg7''' (third time)
:'''51. Qb2'''
Under modern rules, Black could claim a draw by informing the arbiter of their intention to play 50...Kg7, producing the same position as had occurred after 42...Qe3 and 46...Kg7. Alternatively, after 51.Qb2, Black could claim a draw immediately because White has repeated the position after 43.Qb2 and 47.Qb2. Burn went on to win the game.<ref>{{Harvcol|Giddins|2012|pp=166–67}}</ref>
{{clear}}