As I will explain in the discussion section, this rule arose from providing a logical basis for Ing's fighting ko/disturbing ko distinction. I realized that this rule could apply to both.

Ing ko rules and superko rules operate quite differently. Superko rules prohibit the repetition of a position or situation, allowing the superko to proceed up to the point of repetition. Ing rules prohibit the capture of hot stones, which typically occurs earlier than repetition. In fact, they prohibit , because of a potential repetition. (I have now revised my rule so that is prohibited.)

Ending a potential repetitive sequence early can prevent a player from executing a plan other than playing the superko. For instance, White here can play for a seki. As against that, it does make playing and administering the ko rule much easier. For complex kos there can be many different possible repetitive positions. It may be much easier to realize that there is a potential repetition than that one has just occurred. IMX, a major objection to a superko rule is just this question of recognizing a repetition in play, and the burden of keeping track of a number of possible repetitive positions.

(¡evidently not!)