You must be on move to make a claim. Starting your opponent’s clock ends your move and thus ends your option to make any claim (you can’t claim during your opponent’s move).
Some claims can be made while the opponent’s clock is running. For example, a loss on time.
The closest you can come is to make the move and STOP the clocks, in order for it not to be your opponent’s move.
What about 28D3, 28D4 and 28D5, all of which appear to allow a director to use ratings other than the published rating? Also see the TD Tip after 28C.
What am I missing?
You’re missing the meaning of the word ‘entitled’ in my post.
Directors have the CHOICE to use an unofficial rating or even an estimate for a player who does not yet have a published rating, but they are not REQUIRED to do so. What they cannot use is a rating LOWER than the published ratings being used for that event.
The advance publicity should state what policies the organizers are using assuming they aren’t using the standard rule (ie, only the current published rating is used.)
LMAO @
Call the TD to your board and say, "My move, bla to bla bla, will repeat the position for the third time which also occured on move bla and move BLA with my opponent to move. Do you want me to make this move on the board or stop the clocks while you are looking at it?
Wouldn’t you point it out to your opponent first? If he agrees then you have a draw without the distraction of dragging a TD over.
14C says that the player on the move may make a claim of threefold repetition. If you make the move and start your opponent’s clock, it’s his move – you are no longer “the player on the move” and may not make a claim.
As for the comment elsewhere on the second part, it depends on the opponent. Some players resent being spoken to by the opponent, and some will not understand the rule. (Horrible example: A tells B he’s claiming a draw by repetition. B agrees. Later B
finds out that it wasn’t really a repetition after all. The draw stands, but you really don’t need the aggravation.) It’s usually safer and easier to call the TD.
There is a GOOD reason you can’t claim triple occurrence after completing your move.
If that were legal, you could play your move, press your clock, then contemplate (on your opponent’s time) whether to claim the draw. The opponent, suspecting that you are so contemplating, might feel pressured to move quickly, in order to destroy the triple occurrence and remove any possibility of a valid claim.
Obviously, it would be unfair to have a rule which pressures an opponent to move more quickly than conditions would otherwise require.
To put it another way, it would be unfair to start the opponent’s clock before all information about the position (including claims) is on the table.
Bill Smythe
I like that wording! Thanks.
You may have forgotten the most popular of all:
All players who are due for White are assured of having White.
Bill Goichberg
I won’t argue any of what you said - I agree with it all. It’s pefectly OK to call over the TD first. But it’s also perfectly OK for a player to inform the opponent one is claiming the draw on threefold rep, and if the other player agrees, you have a draw.
My reasoning is… If I am called over to the board on a threefold claim, the first thing I will do is ask the other player, “Do you agree to the draw?” As all draw claims are first draw offers. If Player B agrees, it doesn’t matter later if it was threefold or not. (Then again, you claimed it a horrible example… 
)
And you can’t penalize a player for an annoyance violation for making a draw claim/offer - not the first time. And again, it is first a draw offer before a draw claim. The most that could happen is the position isn’t threefold, and the opposite player is credited for two minutes.
If the player agrees it’s a draw by three fold repetition and then later on discovers it wasn’t then it’s his own darn fault that he didn’t look at the position closer. If I’m claiming three fold repetition, I’ll say so. If the player doesn’t agree then I’ll get the TD, otherwise why bother the TD? I think in all my games I’ve only had to get the TD once to verify a 3 fold claim.
If I make a regular draw offer I’m not calling over the TD before I make it, so why should this be any different?
In theory it shouldn’t, but if the player shows up later whining “My opponent lied to me! He bulldozed me into thinking it was a draw! I didn’t know all the pieces had to be on the same squares!”, it won’t be fun for the TD. It’s just safer all around to do it by the book. Of course, if you stop the clock and say, “I’m calling the TD to claim a draw by repetition,” there’s a decent chance your opponent will simply say “OK, draw.”
It’s happened to me more than once, but my most interesting one occurred in Milwaukee several years ago. I had created a triple occurrence with three different moves, the first one a capture. The opponent was highly skeptical, so I offered to get the TD, but then he relented. To this day I hope he didn’t think I was trying to flim-flam him.
Bill Smythe
Presumably the perception that this is a rule was started by the TD Tip under 15A1.
The rule itself discussion exception to the requirement to keep score.
The TD Tip itself begins
“Director often deduct time from the clocks of players at the the start of the game whom they excuse from keeping score…”
So possibly that sort of answers the original question. Yes I understand this not a rule but instead a TD Tip.
My most recent claim of 3-fold repetition was against a 2200 player. The moves between the first and second occurrences were different than between the second and third. Many players think that the moves must be identical.
Despite a TD telling him for about 10 minutes that my claim was valid, he refused to accept it. The TD finally told him “I’m ruling it a draw”. I should add that my opponent is also a certified TD. When I spoke to him the next day, he claimed he knew the rule but had difficulty counting to three.
I remember bending my head around the concept that it is triple occurrence of position, not moves. And had to explain that to an opponent once in a non-rated game, when I saw the opportunity to hoover out a draw instead of losing; I had a perpetual check, but in the sequencing of it the move order wasn’t necessarily repetitious.
I’ve never had to call a TD for a repetition draw, but I did have to call a TD when an opponent tried to “take back” a draw offer once. He offered the draw on his turn, so I told him to make his move, and I’d think about it. He moved. I thought for about 3 minutes, then accepted the draw, at which point, he tried to say that he didn’t want the draw any more. The TD straightened him out. Apparently, he had only offered the draw because he thought he was losing. When he realized that I didn’t see the killer move to finish him off, he thought he could swindle the win.