question re blitz chess draw by repetition

[donaldheron]

First, I’m not sure what CS rule Andy is referring to; that was not relevant to my decisions on Sunday. However, we should start with the FIDE Law for Blitz which allows for two situations, the ideal one being:

The Competition Rules shall apply if
a. one arbiter supervises one game and
b. each game is recorded by the arbiter or his assistant and, if possible, by electronic means.

Under these conditions, it would be possible to claim a draw by repetition in a blitz game. This clearly could not apply at the Team Lightning. I consider that it follows that when responsible for 40 games the arbiter cannot be expected to follow any one to the extent of watching for repetitions or 50-move rule draws, etc. Claims for these would therefore lack the necessary proof. The ethics of playing for a win by “negative” means are a different issue.

The solution is of course to move to the use of a time limit with increments, such as 3 minutes + 2 seconds per move; that will come in due course.

Thank you Ken: I thought it was me but I could not find a CS rule either. I think your reply confirms Andy's original answer because there are many situations where, ideally, an arbiter ocerlooks each game. The fact that, practically, we cannot do that does not invalidate any other rule such as illegal move. That is to say if a player makes an illegal move and his opponent claims the game the opponent could be dishonest and deny that he had done so: this would not mean that you cannot claim for illegal move. I would suggest that draw by repetition is the same. Of course, all this is now purely academic for me as I find the whole idea of playing blitz again to be repulsive. Perhaps banning blitz as a form of chess is the best solution.