This would be an interesting scenario. What if they also removed 3 fold repetition draw?
If they remopve both the 50 move rule and the 3 fold repetition rule, then a chess game could go on forever.
For practical purposes this would not change that much as alomost all games end in another way, but a game that could go on indefinitely cannot attribute a definite score win/draw/loss to each pôsition.
Some games would be won by the player who can prevent longer to fall asleep.
@sheckley666 lol that would be funny to watch
repetition and 50 mole rule guarantee that game ends. Otherwise it could be infinite. 3- move rules could be replaced by forbidding repetition of position alltogether or ban for example third repetition. Like in Go which has ko-rule to avoid repetition. For 50 moves I cannot see any rule that could replace it
i guess games on online sites like this one could go on forever... ridiculous. so they must, for practical purposes, enforce that rule, which to me is NOT a rule of chess. it's a rule of whatever chess federation you play under.
in otb play, you have a clock and that would determine the winner, and games don't go on forever... i guess unless you are using an increment.. i used the 50 move rule once - because i was in time trouble. i would've lost via clock if i hadn't invoked that rule, which was ina uscf game. since i invoked the rule, and 50 moves went by, i got a draw. when people ask me about three fold repetition or the 50 move rule (rare), i tell them that's only in uscf chess, which includes a bunch of rules such as: you are writing your game down on a score sheet, etc.. if you're not recording your moves, i don't consider the 50 move or three fold repetition enforceable..............
i teach kids chess, and with them, i tell them that if they want to move pieces back and forth forever, it's their choice (. so far, everyone agrees to a draw immediately lol.....)
to me, you can't pick and choose which official uscf rules you enforce, and which you decide to ignore (such as recording your game, which is required in all games).
50 move rule and 3 repetitions are also in fide ruleset.
ICCF (like fide is to otb chess, iccf is to correspondence) has 3 repetitions rule, but in position with 7 or less pieces there is no 50 move rule, instead tablebase evaluation is used.
As a funny side effects some positions which are drawn in otb chess are now winnable. For example queen against two minor pieces, no pawns, is winnable for side with queen, but usually you need more than 50 moves for first capture.
There is no chess federation that does not have the 50 move rule and repetition rule. So they should enforced in all the tournaments. In short time limits with no recordign of moves 3-move repetition may need calling an arbiter. Though I can recall incident where players disagreed on the rule.
as for "unless you are using increment" just about all chess tournaments are using increment. So 50 move rule necessary to end the games. Besides game should allways termiate in a friendly game. Hence the rule has been in rules ever since 1561
In Shatranj had similar rule. So it has been there long time (for obvious reason)
@sirkmatija @petri999 .... i'm making a distinction between tournament chess, which is run under some chess federation rules, vs. guys in some non-sanctioned setting........ i can't stand it when people invoke the 50 move rule or three-fold position move in those circumstances and act as tho those are actual rules --- they're not, afaik... i think it's fine if people agree to a certain set of rules prior to playing an informal game, but i believe if they want to invoke the 50 move rule they must record their game also.
most informal games do NOT have guys recording their moves.......... to me asking for a 50 move limit would be very hard to enforce. and, again, cherry picking rules to play by................that is, each player is probably not recording his game.
You actually don't need to record a game in most common cases for easy identification of these rules. 50 move rule is usually in "hard" pure piece mate endings (2B against lone king, 1B and 1N against lone king), so the losing side just has to gleefuly count moves until winning side botches the win. Other common case is absurdly blocked positions.
3 repetitions usually (but of course not always) occur close enough together to be easily noticed.
While I can understand ignoring 50 move rule in casual games (it's rare enough and usually in positions which are going to be drawn by agreement earlier anyway), ignoring 3 repetitions rule makes treating perpetual checks weird.
@pawnmulch so how would you treat perpetual check in a casual game?
I also think it's a bit weird to argue based on non-sanctioned setting and not on standard serious chess, since people who ignore 50-move and 3-repetition rules also tend to castle through check in my experience.