I never had this situation occur to me so I don't know what the exact rules are. I've reached an endgame where i was lucky to draw the game because i could endlesly check my opponent. However, my opponent tried to escape from the checks, which is a mistake because it can possibly bring him more problems. When he doesn't realise soon enough I will get a winning position or possibly mate. If he goes back to a corner ill just keep checking him. I'm not posting the game because it's still ongoin, and I dont want advice on how to play.

What I do want to know, when will the game be declared drawn because of the endless checks (without taking 3fold repetition in consideration)? After 50 moves withouth taking material? I already checked him 10 times now and I think I need at least 10 more before reaching a winning position in which i can stop giving check. Will the game be declared drawn before that?

Thanks in advance.

The game is declared draw when both players agree to it. One of you has to offer a draw and the other has to accept it.

I think you can get the answer to your question by looking at the rules of chess on this website. On the top menu under "Learn" click on "Chess Rules & Basics". There is a section on draws. (Normally I'd say more, but I'm cautious since your game is still on going.)

I think 20 checks in a row is a draw...

(not exactly sure, about 85% sure)

bobobbob wrote:

I think 20 checks in a row is a draw...

This is simply false. See the rules that I pointed to above.

Also, check out number 189 on this page:

http://www.xs4all.nl/~timkr/chess2/diary_10.htm

Black has 60 checks in a row before white wins!

Without mutual agreement, and without repetition of position (which means the same position for all pieces and the same player to move 3 times, --chess.com's rules are not clear on that if memory serves) then I believe the 50 move rule applies which is unfortunate in a slow computer game.  If there were a live referee, one could claim "insufficient losing chances", or some such. I have never heard of a 20 move rule.  Someone recently posted a "Interesting Draw" forum where he checked with his rook chasing the opponent's king all over the board and if his opponent captured the rook, it would be stalemate.  No repetition of position applied, but he demonstrated that he could do it indefinitely. Will try to post official rule link.

Good clear rule link with more link to Official FIDE rules etc.

http://www.chessvariants.org/d.chess/chess.html

Scoll about 85% of the way down to get the drawn game explanations.

Escapest_Pawn wrote:

Without mutual agreement, and without repetition of position (which means the same position for all pieces and the same player to move 3 times, --chess.com's rules are not clear on that if memory serves)

The rules that I pointed to on chess.com are clear. "A game may end in a draw if: A player declares a draw if the same exact position is repeated three times (though not necessarily three times in a row)". The only possible ambiguity is what constitutes a "position". FEN is a standard definition of a chess position and the inclusion of the FEN string on every diagram on chess.com indicates chess.com's endorsement of this definition of a position. Of course, FEN includes things like side to move, castling ability and en passant squares. So it's implicit that chess.com would include these things in the meaning of "same exact position".

Good point about the ambiguity of "position", as noted by Loomis.

FIDE, in 1964, made a clarification that the dynamic characteristics of the position must be duplicated, such as the ability/inability to castle, but such cases are rare where this must be invoked ("and if the possible moves of all pieces are the same") as cited in his chapter on 'castling' within Tim Krabbe's incredible book "Chess Curiosities".

USCF rules cover the repetition rule similarly.

The game is finished now. I gave 16 checks in a row and came out a queen up. My opponent had the better position for the entire game, and i thought i was pretty lucky i came out with a draw with perpetual check. However, my opponent tried to find a way out which gave me the opportunity to add material to the attack and win it in the end. Quite a sour game for him, he deserved the win.

If someone is interested, this is the game:

 Loomis.

I always thought that the ""same exact positon "referred, to the pieces on the chessboard,not a FEN string. But thank you for clairifying a rule that was "clear".