No draw is created automatically. If you think that some draw rule should be applied to your game, give me its ID and I will declare a draw.

Interesting because the primary intention of the repeated positions x 3 draw is to resolve a perpetual check where one player may not want to agree a draw. But the opportunity also exists to have the same postition repeated 3 times by other means, even by accident. I once played a game where the situation arose where my King was being chased around the board. I was able to manufacture the same postiion 3 times with about 10-15 moves between each occurance ... when I pointed this out my opponent he was not happy but had to accept the draw (in fact he was real mad as he was 2 minor pieces up!) ... a fluke, yes, legitimate, also yes, played for again, yes! So, what were my opponent's choices, maybe to move differently and avoid the situation if he thought he could win, if not, good play on may part.

I think the same applies here. If a player wants to win then do something different or else accept that there will be a draw. A person in a losing position can use this tactically to better their lot, if you don't like it do something else. A perpetual check may be able to be instigated by someone in a losing position but if you are winning and don't avoid it then you have been tactically defeated (drawn?!).

My vote is that it should be a draw, 3 repeated positions, irrespective of the pieces available for placement.

Ug, I was not aware of the Shogi precedent, but without it I think the logic still stands. It may well be (as we both point out) that the original intention was to avoid a perpetually repeated situation but, as with a lot of rules, there is sometimes a sting and with loop chess I think this is a good sting which places the emphasis on the attacker to avoid the draw. Maybe this is a working out of my Australian nature to support the underdog :)