English Chess Forum

Does anyone here have any experience on when it is best to repeat a position in time trouble to make the time control and when it can be counter-productive? I was faced with this choice in a recent game, and I was concerned that I might repeat the position three times without realising it (it is quite easy to do this if you are rushing the moves). I came to the conclusion afterwards that it would have been better for me to have taken a step back, to have realised I was easily winning, and to have just played simple and strong moves rather than getting distracted by repeating the position.

I suppose it depends largely on the specifics of the position. If you have only a few moves to go to the time control, then repeating moves will get you there. In my case, I had 8 moves to go. I could have triangulated checks (using up four moves) and then captured a pawn with check and done the same sequence of checks again, thus easily making the time control. But I actually found it difficult to think about this calmly with my flag hanging.

Is repeating the position in time trouble actually helpful or not? Has anyone here ever forced a draw by repetition in time trouble rather than try and play on and risk losing? Or has anyone ever had someone repeat the position three times by accident in a winning position when repeating moves in time trouble?

Apologies for stating the obvious but in time trouble it is usually impossible to make correct decisions which is why we should never get into it. I too have settled for a draw to avoid losing only to find that I had a won ending. It really depends on the specifics but I think the best answer is to do everything you can to avoid putting yourself in such a position where you have to make snap decisions. Even the very best in the world get it badly wrong under such circumstances. Personally I always take my level of fatigue into account, and sometimes let that take precedence if I know there is a lot of play left in the position, especially if I have another game that day...but that's just me

No need to apologise. You are quite right. I've not posted the position as it was embarassingly easy to win. My point was that playing simple strong moves might have been better. Though I guess that is obvious as well.

Christopher Kreuzer wrote:Does anyone here have any experience on when it is best to repeat a position in time trouble to make the time control and when it can be counter-productive?

Assuming the opponent is unable to avoid the repetition, you could do so, not only to reach a time control, but to gain time so as to decide whether or not to play for a win. In a match or the last round of a tournament, you might need to take a view on the plausible outcomes of other games.

There was a game many years ago, by Jon Mestel, I think, where he had repeated to reach a time control. He then analysed a winning continuation, but to reach it, he would have had to repeat the position for the third time before varying. So he had to find another way to win.

In the many years I played chess, I always thought that time-trouble affected my results more than anything else. There's some interesting advice on how to handle time pressure in Webb's classic Chess for Tigers, though I'm not sure about his 'barrage technique'.

I agree, his 'barrage technique' where you play a number of moves very quickly to blitz your opponent could lead to making an unfortunate blunder. It may have worked in the days before increments.

MJMcCready wrote: There's some interesting advice on how to handle time pressure in Webb's classic Chess for Tigers, though I'm not sure about his 'barrage technique'.

That involved blitzing out a sequence of moves without pausing to record them. That was legal at the time but before the second edition, it had become against the Laws of Chess if you had more than five minutes remaining. Subsequently it was never legal with increments provided they were thirty seconds or greater.

What does remain legal is making an immediate reply and then recording both your opponent's move and your own.

MJMcCready wrote:In the many years I played chess, I always thought that time-trouble affected my results more than anything else. There's some interesting advice on how to handle time pressure in Webb's classic Chess for Tigers, though I'm not sure about his 'barrage technique'.

I have a vague memory that one of his suggestions was to (covering the scoresheet as you did it) write down a forced sequence of moves and blitz that out in your opponent's time trouble. I would go and look that up in my copy of Webb's book, but I can't find that at the moment (clearly I need to spend less time playing or analysing chess, or even posting on various forums about the National Chess Library, and spend more time sorting out my own collection of chess books!).

I managed to get into time trouble again in my game yesterday evening. The good news is that my opponent was also in time trouble and I didn't have to worry about trying to repeat the position. I just ran away with my king until he ran out of checks and resigned. Bit lucky, but hey, it all balances out in the end doesn't it?

"I have a vague memory that one of his suggestions was to (covering the scoresheet as you did it) write down a forced sequence of moves and blitz that out in your opponent's time trouble."

I'm sure Chris is aware that that is illegal now as well. Someone tried it in an event at which I was arbiter a couple of years ago, and he apologised when I warned him, then got cross when I gave his opponent two extra minutes, thus easing the time trouble. "What are you complaining about? I could have defaulted you", made him think.

Repeating the position is handy with increments as well. You can gain a minute easily, which certainly helped me last night.