Since I saw the theoretical possibility that repetition could occur, I asked several active players, and posted a question to rec.games.board. Most of the reponses were negative "never seen it", but a posting from Phillip Cohen was more interesting. That post is the basis for this page.
Phillip Cohen Wrote:
...Curiously, a couple of days after this note appeared, the latest issue of *NOST-Algia* arrived, and John McCallion's column contained an annotated Scrambled Eggs LOA game with the first possible forced repetition I ever recall seeing. The game (Walt Roessner v. Paul Yearout)
B 1 b1 b3 W 2 a2 c2 B 3 a5 c5 W 4 e1 e3 B 5 a7 e3+ W 6 g1 g3 B 7 a3 f3 W 8 f8 f5 B 9 c8 f5+ W 10 c2 f5+ B 11 d1 g4 W 12 a6 c4 B 13 b3 g3+ W 14 c4 g4+> B 15 c5 f5+ W 16 h7 f5+ B 17 f1 f4 W 18 b8 f4+ B 19 e8 e6 W 20 a4 e4 B 21 e6 g6 W 22 d8 f6 B 23 h4 f6+ W 24 h3 g2 B 25 h2 h5+ W 26 c1 c2 B 27 g8 h7 ;Check! W 28 g2 h3 B 29 f6 g5 ;Check! W 30 e4 h4 ;Check!
The interesting thing about the diagram is the possibility of continuing with
B 31 g6 e6.
White can respond
W 32 h4 e4;check!
Suppose Black moves back with
B 33 e6 g6;Check!
White will not stand for that, and so plays
W 34 e4 h4;Check,
and we're back where we started.
JM wrote, 'There is at present no official rule to cover this situation. Rather than have the game end in a draw, Robin and I would prefer to borrow a rule from Chinese Chess: the player about to repeat a position for the third time must vary the move or lose.
In fact, the game continued this way, so repetition didn't play a part in the outcome; but clearly, it could have, and therefore can be a factor in real games.
B 31 e3 e4 W 32 c2 b3 ;Check! B 33 g3 c3 W 34 h3 e6 ;Check! B 35 f3 d5 W 36 e6 e4+ ;Check! B 37 g6 e6 W 38 h4 d4 ;Check! B 39 h7 h4 W 40 b3 b4 ;Check! (2 ways) B 41 e6 e4+ W 42 b4 c5 ;Check! (2 ways)
my home page