Quintuple repetition and the FIDE's 2014 rulebook revision

The only question is whether the same position has occured ( = the FEN notation would be the same) multiple times ( = five different # of moves apply to the same position). Nothing is said about move sequences.

In the Jan 2018 Laws (and indeed the previous version too, but that's history) the rule is replaced with:

9.6.1 [The game is drawn if] the same position has appeared, as in 9.2.2 [Draw by Repetition] at least five times.

And the game ends immediately, like mate, pat, dead position & 75 moves. So this issue is resolved. I do feel that, little by little, the FIDE Laws are improving.

The rule is there to stop players playing on repeating the position ad infinitum. Threefold repetition has to be claimed by a player, an arbiter can step in to end the game in a draw after fivefold repetition.

During the FIDE refresher course for International Arbiters, it has been strongly recommended to apply this rule very strictly. Which means that IA are strongly encouraged to change an already signed result if it is later discovered that a quintuple repetition has occurred.

After a quintuple repetition, the game is drawn without any formality, no claim is required. The game is also implicitly over, meaning that all that happens after is irrelevant. For the 75 moves draw, if there is a mate, it will prevail.

If the result reported by the players is anything other then a draw, this means that both players have, wilfully or not, signed a wrong result. This situation is governed by Article 8.7

At the conclusion of the game both players shall sign both scoresheets, indicating the result of the game. Even if incorrect, this result shall stand, unless the arbiter decides otherwise.

First note that your link to Geurt Gijssen. Arbiter's Notebook. is broken. ChessCafe.com have put almost all their stuff behind a paywall.

The purpose of this rule and of the related 75-move rule (after 75 moves with no captures or pawn moves the arbiter can / must step in and declare a draw) are for the benefit of arbiters. In summary they are the "I've got a home to go to and a warm bed waiting for me" rules. The key point here being that these two rules do not require a player to make a claim but instead the arbiter can intervene to stop the game.

Your example is not a draw under the rule. Here is how it works:

White's alternate moves must be identical. Black's alternate moves must be identical. For 5 consecutive, alternate White's turns the position must be identical. For 5 consecutive, alternate Black's turns the position must be identical.

If that gobbledygook sounds confusing here is an example of a drawn game under the new rule:

1) Nc3 Nc6 2) Nb1 Nb8 3) Nc3 Nc6 4) Nb1 Nb8 5) Nc3 Nc6 6) Nb1 Nb8 7) Nc3 Nc6 8) Nb1 Nb8 9) Nc3 Nc6 10) Nb1 Nb8 11) Nc3 Nc6

Note that after Black's 4th move White could have claimed a draw under the 3-fold repetition rule and after White's 5th move either player could claim a draw on their turn.

If either player deviates from the strict repetition then the conditions are not fulfilled. For instance if White's 3rd and 4th moves are Nf3 and Ng1 then the strict sequence required for the satisfaction of the rule is broken.

Note that the rule says "for at least five consecutive alternate moves by each player". If it said "either player" instead of "each player" then the position and sequence in question would be a draw. But the example fails because it is only identical before alternate White moves and not before alternate Black moves.

Since 3-fold repetition draws can only be claimed when the moves are recorded they cannot normally be claimed during rapid and blitz games. The new rules allow the arbiter to intervene and stop the game provided he has witnessed and noted the moves and continue with the next round or go home to bed.

30/12/2014: There were two International Arbiters at our club annual rapid championship last night. I asked one of them and he was very clear. The rule:

the same position has appeared, as in 9.2b, for at least five consecutive alternate moves by each player.

according to him means that after 5 alternate white moves the position must be the same in the meaning of 9.2b and after 5 alternate black moves it must be the same in the meaning of 9.2b and that this sequence of moves must be consecutive i.e. the first repeating black position must come immediately before or immediately after the first repeating white position and not part way through the sequence.

PS It's probably worth noting the answer he gave to a supplementary question.

Question: What happens if after one player wins through resignation / checkmate / flag fall it is discovered that there was an earlier 5 fold repetition? Should the result be changed to a draw?

Answer: Emphatically no. Just as the 3 fold repetition rule is for the benefit of the players, they may choose to claim by it or not at the specific time the incident occurs, so is the 5 fold repetition rule for the benefit of the arbiter, he may choose to enforce it or not at the time the incident occurs. He may not enforce it retrospectively. The win stands.

Edit: Well, it seems that the IA I consulted was wrong. Hidden away in section 6.2a of the FIDE Handbook it says this

A move is also completed if: 1.the move ends the game (see Articles 5.1.a, 5.2.a, 5.2.b, 5.2.c, 9.6a, 9.6b and 9.7)

9.6a and 9.6b are the two new draw rules, 5-fold repetition and 75 moves with no captures or pawn moves. So, they are elevated by this throw-away clause to the same level as checkmate, stalemate, resigns and agreed drawn. The arbiter has no more choice than he does with checkmate, etc.

this seems to be quite academical, because after 6... before intending Bc8 which would get into a threefold repition of position the black player may request a draw.