deferred draw acceptance

The act of developing or disclosing that which is unknown.
User avatar
Mats Winther
Posts: 194
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 5:27 pm
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Contact:

deferred draw acceptance

Post by Mats Winther » Sun Dec 26, 2010 8:14 pm

This idea of mine will eliminate early draws. When a player proposes a
draw, his opponent can continue playing and choose to accept the draw
at any time, in a lost position, even, provided that he still has a
queen on the board. This means that if you propose a draw, the opponent
can latch out in fierce attacking play, without risk of losing. The
effect is that people will only propose an early draw when they are
certain that the position cannot be won for either party, or they are
both so tired that they can't go on playing. A corollary of the rule
is this:

A draw can only be accepted in deferment if the player still has a
queen on the board.


So the player receiving the draw offer can risk starting a king attack,
but if he thinks he is going to win the ensuing endgame, then he has
lost the right to accept the draw in deferment, so he can still lose.

So this is essentially an opening and middlegame rule. As soon as the
queens are exchanged, players can agree on a draw in the usual manner.
Of course, if the queens remain on the board, and it's meaningless to
go on, players can still agree on a draw, which is good.

Mats
http://home7.swipnet.se/~w-73784/chess/ ... riants.htm

User avatar
IM Jack Rudd
Posts: 4101
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:13 am
Location: Bideford

Re: deferred draw acceptance

Post by IM Jack Rudd » Sun Dec 26, 2010 8:20 pm

It won't eliminate prearranged non-games, it won't do anything about draws agreed in positions from variations with early queen swaps (eg 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.O-O Nxe4 5.d4 Nd6 6.Bxc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 Nf5 8.Qxd8+), and it'll create really weird incentives in other positions. I don't like this idea.

User avatar
Mats Winther
Posts: 194
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 5:27 pm
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Contact:

Re: deferred draw acceptance

Post by Mats Winther » Sun Dec 26, 2010 8:34 pm

But no rule can eliminate prearranged games, anyway. And this is not a big problem. A big problem is when people make cowardly draws in the middlegame or opening, with the queens still remaining on the board. Of course, if both players wish to make a draw, then they can always play the French exchange and swap queens on the open file. But this is not generally how cowardly draws take place. They often occur in middlegames when players are too lazy or lack courage to go on, or are thinking in rating terms.

As to the "weird incentives". Well, this is not a problem because the draw proposal will hardly ever occur if the position isn't already a dead draw, i.e. a completely locked position, or whatever. The player receiving the draw offer is then pressured to sacrifice in order to break through, and then it becomes a game of chess again. He can still lose if he doesn't accept the draw offer before his queen disappears from the board.

The point is to eliminate draws in opening and middlegame, without going as far as prohibiting draws when the queens are left on the board.

Mats
Last edited by Mats Winther on Mon Dec 27, 2010 6:10 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
IM Jack Rudd
Posts: 4101
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:13 am
Location: Bideford

Re: deferred draw acceptance

Post by IM Jack Rudd » Sun Dec 26, 2010 9:04 pm

Sofia Rules do the same job, don't involve massive rewrites of the rules of chess, and don't make a draw offer a suicidal tactic.

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 9085
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: deferred draw acceptance

Post by Alex Holowczak » Sun Dec 26, 2010 9:59 pm

Mats Winther wrote:They often occur in middlegames when players are too lazy or lack courage to go on...
...or when they have to periodically insert their scoresheet into an envelope, then continue the game several weeks later. The majority of draws between move 30-40 around here tend to be for that reason.

I guess that's a problem with your proposal. You could offer a draw, play on for a bit, seal a move, and then work out something vaguely attacking with the help of who/whatever knowing you can still claim a draw. For games with adjournments, would the draw offer still be acceptable in different playing sessions? In some leagues, you could string a game on into the fourth or fifth session with an ever-worsening position, and then claim the draw. The point of the previous four sessions would just have been to be a nuisance, hoping your opponent gets fed up eventually.

User avatar
Christopher Kreuzer
Posts: 7527
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 2:34 am
Location: London

Re: deferred draw acceptance

Post by Christopher Kreuzer » Sun Dec 26, 2010 10:24 pm

Mats Winther wrote: But this is not generally how cowardly draws take place. They often occur in middlegames when players are too lazy or lack courage to go on, or are thinking in rating terms.
I have to interject here, and ask what on Earth is wrong with draws in knife-edge positions where both players are uncertain about what the result will be if they play on? At grandmaster level, yes, the watching audience would like to see (metaphorical) blood on the board, but even at that level you will get positions where both players will bottle it or genuinly be unable to correctly assess the position, and that's not necessarily a bad thing - it is part and parcel of the sporting element of the game.

And the bit about rating points seems a bit off as well. If someone knows a draw will be good for them in terms of rating points, or a title norm (to use a better example), why force them to play differently with this rule in place, and forbid them from seeking an early cessation of hostilities (by over-the-board play, of course, not pre-arranged draws)?

And you forget people agreeing or aiming for early draws through illness or a need to finish games early for whatever reason. Or agreeing a draw for the sake of the team, or to secure first prize in a tournament. A rule like the one you propose is interesting, but too restrictive, really.
Mats Winther wrote:As to the "weird incentives". Well, this is not a problem because the draw proposal will hardly ever occur if the position isn't already a dead draw, i.e. a completely locked position, or whatever. The player receiving the draw offer is then pressured to sacrifice in order to break through, and then it becomes a game of chess again. He can still lose if he doesn't accept the draw offer before his queen disappears from the board.
"pressured to sacrifice in order to break through" - this presume that sacrificing is the only way to play for a win. There are other ways to win, such as positionally, and in endgames. There is nothing to prevent someone declining such a draw offer and playing on normally and still grinding out a win without sacrificing.
Mats Winther wrote:The point is to eliminate draws in opening and middlegame, without going as far as prohibiting draws when the queens are left on the board.
And the bit about queens being left on the board or not, to define this proposed rule, is strange. There are many middlegames without queens where attacking play is still possible (some endgames involve tactics as well), and you can also have endgames with the queens still on the board. And what about mating attacks that involve a queen sacrifice? Your rule would actually discourage that!

User avatar
Mats Winther
Posts: 194
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 5:27 pm
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Contact:

Re: deferred draw acceptance

Post by Mats Winther » Mon Dec 27, 2010 6:21 am

Christopher Kreuzer wrote: "pressured to sacrifice in order to break through" - this presume that sacrificing is the only way to play for a win. There are other ways to win, such as positionally, and in endgames. There is nothing to prevent someone declining such a draw offer and playing on normally and still grinding out a win without sacrificing.
Hence we have practically eliminated cowardly draws. The stronger arguments you can find of how stupid it would be to propose a draw in a middlegame position, the more you strengthen my argument.

Mats

Richard Bates
Posts: 3123
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2008 8:27 pm

Re: deferred draw acceptance

Post by Richard Bates » Mon Dec 27, 2010 9:06 am

Apart from totally ignoring the fundamental importance of the draw offer in the psychology of the game (an enormous part of the game being a psychological contest) how on earth would you police the rule? People would only make draw offers verbally, rather than noting it on their scoresheet, and would deny all knowledge if the opponent turns it down. If they ran into an opponent who insisted on written evidence, then they would simply withdraw/deny existence of the offer since such an insistence would in itself be evidence of likely non-acceptance (because anybody who wanted to accept the draw would have no reason to to do so).

And anyway why should people be obliged to play games out, when they are playing for their own enjoyment and nobody else's? If someone gets their basic enjoyment of the game from the early stages of the game with little general interest in time pressure, endgames or even the ultimate result then why should it be anybody else's business? This isn't so far-fetched - i'm sure there are many people who like testing their opening knowledge for example, but have little desire to spend their time playing what they know is extremely low quality chess unavoidably produced by their general playing strength.

The bit about Queens is just silly. What relevance does the existence of Queens on the board have to anything?

User avatar
Mats Winther
Posts: 194
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 5:27 pm
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Contact:

Re: deferred draw acceptance

Post by Mats Winther » Mon Dec 27, 2010 9:55 am

That's easy. Players are obliged to put down an "R" on the scoresheet, and the party receiving the offer can easily verify that the other party does so too.

The queen rule is relevant because we don't want to follow this rule in the endgame. Of course, there exist middlegames without queens, but the whole point is to reduce the number of middlegame and opening positions where a draw proposal would imply a premature end of the game.
/Mats

LozCooper

Re: deferred draw acceptance

Post by LozCooper » Mon Dec 27, 2010 10:07 am

If there had to be any change in the rules concerning draw offers I would rather players who offer multiple draw offers in the same game be punished. Although I've been guilty of this myself I think that once you offer a draw you shouldn't repeat the offer within a few moves regardless of how drawn you consider the position to be. I know the rules partly cover this in terms of distracting your opponent etc

I have no issue with quick draws in amateur chess (as anyone who has played me will testify :oops: )

Richard Bates
Posts: 3123
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2008 8:27 pm

Re: deferred draw acceptance

Post by Richard Bates » Mon Dec 27, 2010 10:26 am

Mats Winther wrote:That's easy. Players are obliged to put down an "R" on the scoresheet, and the party receiving the offer can easily verify that the other party does so too.
OK then, i am playing you and i (verbally) offer a draw. If you insist on me writing it down on the scoresheet then i will claim that i never made an offer in the first place. If you actually would have been amenable to accepting a draw then you have lost out since you no longer have a draw offer to accept. If you didn't want to accept a draw then i have lost nothing (in fact i have even gained since i have now got an indication of your assessment of the position).
Mats Winther wrote:The queen rule is relevant because we don't want to follow this rule in the endgame. Of course, there exist middlegames without queens, but the whole point is to reduce the number of middlegame and opening positions where a draw proposal would imply a premature end of the game.
/Mats
There exist middlegames without queens and endgames with them! I think that what you might call an extremely simplistic distinction. Anyway i don't see why endgames should be exempt from "cowardly" draw agreements, if that's what you are trying to avoid. Alex is always going on about people favouring adjournments because they are scared of playing endgames. Draw proposals almost ALWAYS imply a premature end of the game. Otherwise we'd always play to kings on the board.

LozCooper

Re: deferred draw acceptance

Post by LozCooper » Mon Dec 27, 2010 11:02 am

Slightly off topic but I am reminded of a Keith Arkell quote: "I trapped his queen....... with my queen!" He proceeded to win in 100 moves (queens came off on move 28) in the 1990 British.

Geoff Chandler
Posts: 2292
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 1:36 pm
Location: Under Cover
Contact:

Re: deferred draw acceptance

Post by Geoff Chandler » Mon Dec 27, 2010 12:46 pm

Hi Mats.

All ideas to stop the 'curse of the draw' should be looked at it
and better brains than ours have tried to come up with a good solution.

I thought I had spotted an obvious flaw but then realised there
was a counter catch.

Under this rule only a fool would offer a draw as it places them
in a no win situation which is a good start for your case.

But like it or not some games are drawn and watching every game
going down to stalemate or bare kings because either player is to scared
to offer a draw may be a good laugh for a tournament or two but soon
the novelty will wear off.

Interesting idea though.

PeterTurland
Posts: 541
Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2007 10:03 pm
Location: Leicester
Contact:

Re: deferred draw acceptance

Post by PeterTurland » Mon Dec 27, 2010 2:45 pm

I agree with Jack, three points for a win and one point for a draw makes a draw less likely and makes players take more of a risk, which is better for chess because it is better for the spectators.

The fact that the tourney had only one winner, is also evidence that it is probably the way forward, even McShane tho' it cost him money said in his newspaper column, that it was the way forward.

Alan Walton
Posts: 1318
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 pm
Location: Oldham

Re: deferred draw acceptance

Post by Alan Walton » Mon Dec 27, 2010 3:05 pm

I didn't realise it was April 1st, but a lot of people fell for this

Locked