From: Sam Sloan <sloan <at> ISHIPRESS <dot> COM>
Date: 11 apr 2000
Subject: Re: A funny thing happened in Cincinnati

At 10:45 AM 4/11/00 -0400, Larry Kaufman wrote:
>    It is a universal rule that a repetition due to perpetual check is a
>loss for the player giving perpetual check.  However, I never heard of any
>other attempt to "blame" a repetition on one player or the other based on
>who's "attacking".  This is a standard rule in Chinese Chess (one subject
>to much debate and interpretation), but not in Shogi.  Some events or clubs
>score a repetition in a handicap game as a win for white, and perhaps it
>has been done in even games somewhere, though I don't recall hearing of it.
>

This is not the rule in Chinese chess. The rule is that if one player
repeats moves by repeatedly attacking another, such as for example a rook
which attacks a cannon in perpetuity, then the arbiter will order the
player with the rook to move elsewhere. The game does not end. Rather, the
offending player must make another move.

However, this is the simple case. What happens if the cannon by
happanstance attacks a piece behind the rook on every other move?

My book on Chinese chess, which is entitled "Chinese chess for Beginners",
discusses this, but for the real answer one needs a book published in Hong
Kong by Lee Chi Hoi in Chinese which gives examples of this very complex
rule. It takes an entire book to give all the likely situations.

Also, the Chinese Chinese Chess Federation in Mainland China has a somewhat
different and more complex rule than does the World Chinese Chess Federation.

Sam Sloan

http://www.ishipress.com/cc-rules.htm