One final statement on the claimed draw and I’ll shut up. There is a noticeable difference in how people are playing now because of this. People aren’t playing nearly as hard to win anymore, instead they get into a position in which they simply make the same moves repeatedly in order to claim a draw rather than negotiating the board for a possible win. It has taken a lot away from the game. I predict that this post will be locked in 1, 2, 3…
Last Statement
Posted in
Checkers
Last Statement
Edited by Stevie Jay
Your concern that some players may prefer a safe draw to taking risks is understandable, but repetition-based draws are neither unusual nor arbitrary. They form part of the official rules of the major draughts organizations, including the WCDF, IDF, FMJD, CBJD and FID. It is true that FlyOrDie did not previously apply this rule in English/American draughts. However, that was a deviation from the relevant governing organizations' rules. When the other draughts variants were implemented, the repetition rules were made consistent across the site. In chess, the threefold-repetition rule has always been applied on FlyOrDie as well. The purpose of the rule is straightforward: it prevents a game from continuing indefinitely while the same pieces are moved backwards and forwards. Without such a rule, how many repetitions should be required? 10, 100, or until one player becomes bored or loses on time? A threefold repetition cannot occur if either player breaks the pattern. Therefore, if you do not want the draw, why do you expect your opponent to be the one who must deviate while you continue making the same moves? The player who wants more than a draw must make an attempt to change the position. The practical solution is simple: choose a different continuation no later than the second repetition. Then the same position will not occur for the third time, and there will be no repetition draw. This principle is not unique to draughts. Chess also has a threefold-repetition rule. You are, of course, entitled to believe that the rule should be different. Our position, however, is consistent with that of the governing organizations. You may raise the issue with those organizations and argue that their rules should be changed, but the introduction of the rule on FlyOrDie corrected an earlier inconsistency; it did not create a new or exceptional rule.
4
I've read the site's responses citing "rules" and that repetitive moves allow for a claimed draw. I agree and see the difference in the way players play now. If someone wants to play a game that way, they're not competitive, and looking for a way to never lose. It's downright sickening what these new draw rules have done to the game here, and I think I'm about done with this site.
Edited by J. Sᴛᴇᴡᴀʀᴛ
I will say, I'm not informed enough on the whole matter to make an opinion, but I know this: it didn't used to be this way.
To cite myself: "It is true that FlyOrDie did not previously apply this rule in English/American draughts. " Previously, the attacking player was often in the more comfortable position. They could keep repeating the same sequence until the defending player became bored, made a different move, or eventually ran out of time. The repetition rule changes that. Now, if neither player is willing or able to make progress, the result is a draw instead of being decided by patience, boredom or the clock. It is true that the defending player no longer has to keep track mentally of whether the position has already occurred twice, because the system recognizes the third occurrence automatically. However, in the situations being discussed, the repetition is clearly deliberate. The players know that the same position has already occurred and consciously choose to repeat it. This is also a valid defensive strategy in official over-the-board competition. That is precisely the purpose of the rule: if the players cannot overcome each other, the game should not be decided by who becomes tired of repeating first or whose time expires first. A threefold repetition requires both players to continue the same pattern. If either player wants more than a draw, that player must take the initiative and choose a different continuation.
It is not reasonable to keep repeating your own moves while expecting only your opponent to accept the risk of breaking the pattern.
So the principle is simple: If you do not want the draw, you must be the one who tries to avoid it. I’ll add a notification to the game board when the same position occurs for the second time, so both players know they must deviate to avoid a draw.
Edited by DEVELOPER
2
I've been in games where that applied, and have no problem with it. But, there are games where I have gained an advantage, and I see a path to win, but the losing player, who has now figured out these repeat move rules, will manipulate repeat moves so as to "light up" the claim draw button, and get out of a loss. You can throw rules at me all day...whatever. But I know damn well what I'm talking about. I've experienced it many times. The new claim draw rule has now given a way for a loser to avoid a loss. I just got out of one of those games before I came here and typed this. Yea, I'm still playing here, but not as often, and for less amount of time, each time, because it's really frustrating and sad to play with a group of people.....and there's lots of them.....who have no competitive spirit in them, and are way more worried about some stupid score beside their name.
If you saw a path to victory, what prevented you from taking it the first and second times the position occurred?
I was trying to, I was not making repetitive moves, but my opponent was. You know, believe it or not, I've won games many times even when we got down to each player having only 2 chips left. If we were both making repeat moves, I have no problem with a claim draw appearing, but I was making various moves to set up a situation where I could win.....yes, even with both of us only having 2 chips left. IN THE PAST, I would eventually maneuver to a point where I could trap the opponent in a move where I jumped him, trapping him to the side. After the new rule, the opponent now knows if they can get 3 repeat moves done, they'll claim a draw. You and I are going back and forth with this, and you don't agree, and that's fine. I'm just gonna leave it at this.
The rule is not about “repetitive moves”, it is about the same position recurring: This is the third time this position has occurred, and just like the previous two times, the game has made no progress.
1
