Introducing a new rule in chess!

[Roger de Coverly]

By pointing out the draw notation issue,

If you play in international events where you aren't sure whether you share a language with your opponent, then the notation on the scoresheet has the advantage of demonstrating that the offer has been acknowledged.

That said "U vant Draw" is vaguely universal. Alternatives "U vant Remis" or "Ich spreche Remis"

[Richard Cowan]

Indeed, I've heard of a case where a player got offered a draw, and becasue the position was complex he thought for a while - maybe 30mins. He decided to accept the draw - only for his opponent to tell him he hadn't offered him one!
Because the first player hadn't notated it (=) on his scoresheet, the arbiter said "play on!"

Always use (=)!

[John Upham]

I believe, but might be mistaken, that one can be offered a draw, allow oneself to be flagged and then accept the draw offer.

Is this correct?

[LozCooper]

I believe, but might be mistaken, that one can be offered a draw, allow oneself to be flagged and then accept the draw offer.

Is this correct?

I know more than one case where this has happened. Hopefully an arbiter can advise if this is legally correct.

[Sean Hewitt]

I believe, but might be mistaken, that one can be offered a draw, allow oneself to be flagged and then accept the draw offer.

Is this correct?

I know more than one case where this has happened. Hopefully an arbiter can advise if this is legally correct.

In the scenario described you've lost on time and the game has ended. You can't then accept a draw after the game is over.

[Ian Thompson]

I believe, but might be mistaken, that one can be offered a draw, allow oneself to be flagged and then accept the draw offer.

Is this correct?

I know more than one case where this has happened. Hopefully an arbiter can advise if this is legally correct.

In the scenario described you've lost on time and the game has ended. You can't then accept a draw after the game is over.

You can accept the draw offer after your flag has actually fallen but before the arbiter has observed this or your opponent has claimed your flag has fallen. Perhaps a more interesting question is what the arbiter should do if he is watching the game so he sees the flag fall and hears the draw offer being accepted. They occur more or less simultaneously, so he cannot be sure which happened first. What's the result?

[Sean Hewitt]

Perhaps a more interesting question is what the arbiter should do if he is watching the game so he sees the flag fall and hears the draw offer being accepted. They occur more or less simultaneously, so he cannot be sure which happened first. What's the result?

Things can't happen "more or less simultaneously". They either happen simultaneously or, if not, one thing happens before the other.

[Ian Kingston]

Suppose the draw offer were made just moments before flag fall, causing the recipient of the offer to hesitate and lose on time before the offer could be accepted or a move made. The arbiter might have an interesting decision to make.

[Ian Thompson]

Suppose the draw offer were made just moments before flag fall, causing the recipient of the offer to hesitate and lose on time before the offer could be accepted or a move made. The arbiter might have an interesting decision to make.

So long as the draw offer is made in accordance with the rules (i.e. while the offerer's clock is running) its straight forward. Its a loss on time.

[Ian Kingston]

Suppose the draw offer were made just moments before flag fall, causing the recipient of the offer to hesitate and lose on time before the offer could be accepted or a move made. The arbiter might have an interesting decision to make.

So long as the draw offer is made in accordance with the rules (i.e. while the offerer's clock is running) its straight forward. Its a loss on time.

I was thinking of Article 12.6:

It is forbidden to distract or annoy the opponent in any manner whatsoever. This includes unreasonable claims, unreasonable offers of a draw [emphasis added] or the introduction of a source of noise into the playing area.

Even if the draw offer were made correctly it might still be considered unreasonable.

[Alan Walton]

I got to admit the draw offer before the time control whilst your opponent is in time pressure is purely hypothetical

You really wouldn't offer the draw if you have a chance to win on time, it is down the player short on time to offer the draw

[Gareth Harley-Yeo]

So long as the draw offer is made in accordance with the rules (i.e. while the offerer's clock is running) its straight forward.

Excuse my ignorance... I always thought player A moved, offered a draw and pressed his clock meaning player B would decide on his own time whether or not to accept.

If this isn’t the case and player A must wait with his own time running for Player B’s response, what is stopping Player B from not replying and simply watching Player A’s time run out?

Assuming after a few minutes Player A does not want to waste any more time, he presses his clock. At this point is there no longer a valid draw offer on the table?

[Alan Walton]

I think what Ian is saying, is that the draw offer is made with your own time running then press the clock and your opponent thinks in his own time

[Ian Thompson]

It is forbidden to distract or annoy the opponent in any manner whatsoever. This includes unreasonable claims, unreasonable offers of a draw [emphasis added] or the introduction of a source of noise into the playing area.

Even if the draw offer were made correctly it might still be considered unreasonable.

If your opponent is so short of time that he is in serious danger of losing on time it would be difficult to argue that a draw offer was unreasonable, whatever the position on the board. You're giving him the choice between taking the draw or playing on to win but risking losing on time.

If the draw offer was unreasonable in some other way (e.g. you've been repeatedly offering draws over the last few moves) then I agree, your opponent may have a claim under Rule 12.6.

[Ian Kingston]

It is forbidden to distract or annoy the opponent in any manner whatsoever. This includes unreasonable claims, unreasonable offers of a draw [emphasis added] or the introduction of a source of noise into the playing area.

Even if the draw offer were made correctly it might still be considered unreasonable.

If your opponent is so short of time that he is in serious danger of losing on time it would be difficult to argue that a draw offer was unreasonable, whatever the position on the board. You're giving him the choice between taking the draw or playing on to win but risking losing on time.

If the draw offer was unreasonable in some other way (e.g. you've been repeatedly offering draws over the last few moves) then I agree, your opponent may have a claim under Rule 12.6.

I admit that I'm describing an extreme situation. Let's say that Player A has just 1 or 2 seconds left. Player B moves, and while in the process of transferring his hand to the clock he also says 'Would you like a draw?', pressing the clock the instant he finishes making the offer - all completely legal. Player A might just be distracted for long enough to lose on time even if he wanted to accept the offer.

In that case I would expect the draw agreement to be honoured, even though technically the game is over when the flag falls. But what should the arbiter do if Player B now claims the win? Was Player A distracted by the draw offer or not? Did Player A accept the draw immediately, or only after Player B claimed the win on time? Was the draw offer a deliberate attempt at distraction?