This is the next scenario. You are playing someone 200-300 points higher than you. The game is meaningless. Would you take the draw in an even game right out of the opening or play it out?
Chess Daily News from Susan Polgar
Draw?
I’d play. What’s the good of a free draw if there’s nothing on the line. At least if you play and lose you’ll get some enjoyment out of the game, and you’ll come away with a score sheet you can analyze and learn from.
It depends on what’s at stake. If a draw meant that I would advance or maybe get a cash prize, then I would certainly take the draw.
But, if nothing other than a rating was at stake then I’d play, though, my playing style is defensive anyway.
I’d probably end up playing for a draw even when I’m trying to win due to the higher rated players better abilities.
I’d probably take the draw and the rating points. I doubt a higher rated player would give a game away like that, though. However, there’s a lot to be said for playing against someone with a higher rating. I learn a lot more from my games with higher rateds – most of them losses. But in a real-life situation, if a draw was offered me and I didn’t see a win, I’d probably take it.
It is one thing to achieve a fighting draw against a stronger opponent, but there’s no glory in a breezy draw against even the very best player who’d apparently rather wander out for a cup of coffee than finish a game against you.
Definitely play.
No way.
The only way I would consider it is if I had another matche afterward that meant something. Then I could do it to conserve energy.
Anyway, this scenario would never happen because the person that is rated higher would never agree to it.
chess is a war game – so fight for your life.
Why paying starting fees, if you don’t wanna fight.
Why getting out of bed, if you don’t wanna fight.
No way to give someone a free draw, if nothing is on stake.
Your pride is always on stake.
Really….I’d be very proud of the draw, that is, NOT LOSING.
Be polite and accept the draw. He must have a good reason to offer the draw. he probably just wants to sandbag some points to me. After all Sandbagging is part of the game too. Maybe he has someplace to go like watch another game and have a beer. you know something important.
He probably wants to sandbag the points. And since I have lost some games I was winning and since I am a much better player than my rating I can use the points.
This is what I like about chess. The rules are so accomodating.
I play chess on ICC. I am a very low rated player.
A few days a go I experienced this: I was playing a player with about 150 rating points lower than me. I played a bad opening and was clearly worse, when my opponent forced a draw by forced reptition after 15 moves.
After the game I asked him why he did it. He said it was like a win for him to draw a game against someone who is so much better than him.
I think that’s ridiculous. I am a very weak player. and a weaker player considers it to be a win to draw me.
I asked him if he did it for the rating pts. He said yes. I asked him how old he was. He said 13.
I think that’s even more ridiculous. I told him that if he will continue to play chess, then most probably very soon he will be much higher rated than me anyhow. But the more he refuses to play out games, the less he will learn from them.
However, I can understand it if someone with several 1000 played games, plays a much higher rated player and then accepts or forces the draw.
As for me, I am still in the learning process and in this I rather lose a game and learn from it than draw it and lose the won rating pts against the next player.
Dear Susan,
You ate confusing between what “player wants to do” versus what “the organizer + paying spectators want”.
The onus of wanting no draws is on the organizers + spectators to dictate. The players *will* work the rules to their favor as much as they can. The player’s attitude is not to be attacked. Sometimes a quick draw in the middle of a tournament is a way of conserving energy and is a very valid reason to not to play!
I guess I’m an odd one, because I hate draws. Not in a “draws are all bad” sense — if others want to agree to a draw that’s fine with me.
It would seem to me that to agree to a draw with an even game is like never playing the game in the first place. After all, before the first move, it is an even game. Would you agree to a draw a that point? Frankly, it would make more sense than to waste time playing and _then_ agreeing to a draw with an even game.
there should be set rules regarding draws. no draws allowed if the position is still unclear and barely out of the opening. the draws have been abused by players for too long. they also lead to collusion by groups of individuals such as the russians taking draws to make sure there guys are ready for more important games. you dont see two boxers being allowed to draw a match after the first couple rounds. they have a referee that wont allow that. theyd be banned from boxing if they tryed that when people have payed money to see them fight. you see the players dont get damaged by taking early draws its the fans that have to suffer. chess needs referees to enforce not allowing early draws and making the players actually play the game.
I know this is the standard answer for almost every question, but: it depends on the position.
If an opponent 200-300 points higher is offering me a draw, then chances are that he/she is worse or even losing, because otherwise my opponent would not be offering the draw (assuming that it doesn’t clinch a prize etc.) Therefore I would almost certainly decline the offer and play to win. However, if the position is equal in a “stagnant” sort of way, then I would probably take the draw. If the position is equal in an unbalanced sort of way, then I would size up the opportunities and make a decision from there, depending on tournament standing, mood, etc.
But to tie it back to the other blog entry — there isn’t any moral quandary about whether or not to take (or offer) a draw if there is no such thing as a draw offer! Definitely the best solution by far. Disallow the draw offer and our royal game is all the better for it!
Que preguntas?, alguien cree que si fischer hubiera tomado esas tablas para ganar el oro tendria el prestigio de hoy en día???…ese prestigio es lo que lo transforma en BOBBY FISCHER !!!, es grande por eso….LOS TREBEJOS NO SE MANCHAN !!!!, en la vida privada puede tener defectos, pero su conducyta como ajedrecista es intachable….CREO ES BUEN EJEMPLO???
Calling for Help.
A few days ago I read somewhere on chess this person posted his solution to the draw problem. I can not find it or remember where it was posted. But it has to be some open posting place like here or Mig or something.
Anyway I hope someone remembers. Here is the basic of what he said it was so simple.
To eliminate draws. I think there were like 4 rules.
1. in 3 fold repetition the one who moves into the 3rd rep loses. Exceot he worded it identifying the winner.
2. if it goes to king and king then the one last to take a piece is winner.
3. if goes to 50 move draw then the last one to capture or move a pawn is winner.
4. if stalemate then the last to move is winner. this was probably the first rule.
Anyway, I was amazed at how easy the rules could be written down.
I think he called it something like
the phillip rules of no draws. after himself which was appropriate to me.
Can anyone identify where this is written down.
Thanks
ill take a draw if you offered me one susy. what the first anonymous said has some truth!
I would play on as I am not too concerned with ratings as it comes and goes. I have had this scenario several times and I have always played on and sometimes it was a draw, sometimes I lost and sometimes I converted it to a win.
yIt is not the same case than two posts ago Susan:25,000 dollars were a lot of good reasons for a drawn game.
But if the problem is just 200 or 300 points(for me means to play against a strong FM or IM)I am absolutely open to play for the victory!No draws in this case,I want to fight!
I can lose not a lot rating points playing and losing against a opponent rated 300 points more than me…then where is the risk?
I dunno, it would depend on what I felt like doing. It sounds like the other player wants to get away early and go out drinking or whatever. I like to play opponents who are maybe 100 pts higher than me, so I have an uphill challenge but don’t automatically have a 1-way ticket to lossville. If I want to get crushed by a much stronger player I have a computer that can do that. It’s also possible that the opponent is offering the draw as insurance (i.e. he will win the tournament with 1/2 point but not with an upset loss). In that case my decision might depend on my attitude toward the person.
Finally, the stuff about what the organizers and paying spectators want only matters for invitational tournaments where the organizer is supplying the prize fund. If I were that class of player then I guess I’d have some kind of duty to play out the game. But Class D players like me don’t get invited to those tournaments and nobody pays to watch us. The events we play in are funded by the entry fees we pay ourselves, not by spectators or sponsors. So we don’t have any duty to outsiders.
quoting from an anon: “1. in 3 fold repetition the one who moves into the 3rd rep loses. Exceot he worded it identifying the winner.”
Absurd. The player can be forced into it. That means that the weaker side in a perpetual check gets the win.
“2. if it goes to king and king then the one last to take a piece is winner.”
Absurd. No rationale for that.
“3. if goes to 50 move draw then the last one to capture or move a pawn is winner.”
Absurd.
“4. if stalemate then the last to move is winner. this was probably the first rule.”
Absurd, stalemates are fundamental to chess.
Tie break in the final round of tennis. People want to see actions.
No Draw! I always refuse and play to the death! This has cost me sometimes but I believe the benefits far outweigh the few times I have rejected a draw and ended up losing.
The most natural reult from a game between two evenly matched players should be a draw; draws are just fine and nothing need be done about them.
As far as the topic question, I have often offered draws to players rated 200+ pts lower than me even when I’ve had winning positions and had something else I’d rather do than sit and and grind out a meaningless game for several hours.
It’s all relative to the individual people and their personal expectations. Thinking there is a right or wrong on the issue is probably a bit myopic.
I would take the draw from a guy 200-300 pts higher than me, because he’d be a GM and a draw would be an ok result for me anyway. On the other hand I wouldn’t agree to a draw against anyone 200-300 pts lower than me before the position turned into a dead draw.
I’d play it out. I fear no other player. No game is meaningless… I’m personally SHOCKED you even wrote that…
The tournament rules should require all games to go to at least the first time control.
Baseball – 9 innings
Soccer – 2 halfs
Football – 4 quarters
Hockey – 3 periods
Cricket – who cares???
…
Chess – First Time Control
It’s really that simple. Play to the first time control. That is all we ask as fans.
“Anonymous said…
Calling for Help.”
Yes I remember that post.
That person was….a complete idiot.
Play chess!
I understand some of the issues and problems that people have with short (i.e.
But a few points should be kept in mind:
1. GM John Nunn did some analysis a while ago and pointed out that the proportion of draws between the very top players has not changed very much since the days of Alekhine/Capablanca/Botvinnik. Why is there this sudden hatred of the draw? The Karpov/Korchnoi match of 78 had far more draws (%) than the Topa/Kramnik match last year. Most real chess fans are willing to put up with a few draws in order to get the occasional masterpiece.
2. Chess is not a spectator sport and it never will be – just learn to live with this. Spectator sports are sports where the action is taking place in front of you/on your TV screen and you can see everthing that happens, they are emotionally charged events. In chess the action is going on in the players mind’s. You cant show that on TV as a live event and it is ridiculous to even try. Even a good post game analysis on TV would be very interesting (I would love to see it personnaly) but it would not affect the viewer emotionally the way sport does i.e it would be very interesting/intriguing but not particularly exciting.
3. The grandmaster draw may only be a problem for grandmasters (i.e. a tiny, tiny percentage of chess players) Who cares whether they agree short draws or not as long as the vast majority of players (i.e. rated
The only rule change I would even consider would be to allow draw offers only after the 1st time control and even this only if it began to affect chess for the majority of players.
Some of the other rule changes mentioned here are plain stupid – after 50 moves give a win to the player who took the last piece? – even though he might be down in material and effectively outplayed? Suppose you are up a knight and a bishop against a lone king. Its a win for the stronger side but not an easy one. It can take up to 40 moves and if you make a mistake and let the king out of his cage it could easily take more than 50. In this case would it be fair to give the full point to the weaker side just because he may have taken the last piece? The stronger side should be punished for failing to win, but only by 1/2 point.
I’d play it out. I’m the president of my school’s chess club, and what I tell all of my members is to play out every game whether they are in a won, drawn, or dead lost position, especially if the person they’re playing is rated higher than they are. Even if you lose, you still learn either endgame, mating patterns, or why you lost. Then again, perhaps your opponent isn’t as blunder-proof, or talented at the endgame, as you think he is. You can always try and squeeze that half point out ^_~
-Eric
Most definately play it out.
All of the games I play are meaningless as I only play online on playchess. I haven’t played in a tournament but would like to do so for the first time even though I am almost 40.
If my opponent offered a draw in the early stages I would suspect that he/she has seen something they don’t like. I don’t care a whole lot about my rating points and even so I have little to lose and much to gain if I win.
Saying this I once blundered a piece in a tight game and in frustration gave up two more pieces in succession on purpose. The other player was a few hundred points higher and to my surprise a draw offer appeared. I felt kinda dirty when I accepted and wished that I could take it back and decline so that I could properly resign.