English Chess Forum

I probably offer and agree too many draws 44 percent last year. There are some valid reasons for my drawing tendencies but being scared of losing is one . There is a person in a club I play for that is a lot worse 68 percent, though he does tend to play a relative high board for his grade and try to draw against higher graded players.

I am interested do you know people with a higher draw percentage. DId you used to agree alot of draws for instance and then decide not too or even maybe change your opening to reduce your draw percentage

Steve Dilleigh drew all seven of his games at this year's WECU Championship in Exmouth.

Calendar year 2012, I drew 10 of the few games I played (losing the other one in a time scramble when I should really have disputed my opponent pressing his clock after knocking over a piece) - I think the teams I were playing for won or drew most of these matches, and the team has always come first for me

I solved the problem in 2013 by losing 3 and drawing 5 before I finally won a couple of games

I am better at defending than attacking, and as I get older I have less energy and a lot more on my mind than chess, and I dislike losing more than I like winning, I doubt I am unique in this

Definitely not. I've never had much of a killer instinct.

44 per cent isn't so bad, 68 is a bit much! I checked the likely candidates in Yorkshire and they're a little below that.

My drawing rate depends rather on event/competition. Fairly confident my lifetime drawing rate in big Yorkshire league/county matches is around 80 per cent. Much lower elsewhere, either due to notably weaker/stronger opposition or just the competition.

In terms of personal satisfaction, I have always regarded draws and losses as roughly equivalent. With occasional exceptions, I am as distressed by acceding to a draw as by resigning.

This approach is obviously not appreciated by teammates, so this season, when almost all of my chess has been played for teams, I have tried to soften it, and my draw percentage has risen to around 20 per cent. Even these included several examples of half points being thrown to the winds in absurd winning attempts.

Some people have no real interest in chess from a competitive (result oriented) viewpoint. So the moment a game reaches a point where their interest in the position is diminished, they are quite happy to bring it to a premature end (and this doesn't necessarily apply to just "drawish"/"boring" positions - it could easily apply to highly complicated positions, where the "diminished interest" is caused by not having a clue what is going on). Also in team chess, some people will want to ensure that their game is not a 'match deciding' one (perhaps because of nerves, or not wanting to be in a position of potentially 'letting down' team-mates - so they are happy to bail out early in the piece).

Consider playing more tournament chess with a genuine effort to claim first prize. There are far too many draws in league and county chess in England. As Richard Bates claims, much of it is down to a lack of interest.

Richard Bates wrote:Some people have no real interest in chess from a competitive (result oriented) viewpoint. So the moment a game reaches a point where their interest in the position is diminished, they are quite happy to bring it to a premature end (and this doesn't necessarily apply to just "drawish"/"boring" positions - it could easily apply to highly complicated positions, where the "diminished interest" is caused by not having a clue what is going on). Also in team chess, some people will want to ensure that their game is not a 'match deciding' one (perhaps because of nerves, or not wanting to be in a position of potentially 'letting down' team-mates - so they are happy to bail out early in the piece).

This applies exactly to me.

By 'premature end', do you mean agreeing to a draw when both players have played well and cancelled each other out, rather than waiting until one player messes up his position by blundering?

Worse than that sometimes Not even bothering to try and press slightly, even sometimes somewhat, better endings etc.

My competitive instinct tends to have to come from external sources like the match result. Once that goes/isn't relevant it used to get properly ugly. A bit better over time.

MartinCarpenter wrote: Not even bothering to try and press slightly, even sometimes somewhat, better endings etc.

You might hope that the gains from grinding out wins from unpromising positions would exceed the losses where you blunder or the ending is much worse than you expected. If part of a team needing to win matches, or challenging to win a tournament, being able to reel out a string of wins can be a necessity. That can involve playing until the verdict of the position is clear.


I think there are players who get out of practice of finishing people off. They get good positions, but run short of time and bail out to the draw.

Roger de Coverly wrote:I think there are players who get out of practice of finishing people off. They get good positions, but run short of time and bail out to the draw.

Just a part of the price of playing without digital clocks and increments.

Brian Towers wrote:

Roger de Coverly wrote:I think there are players who get out of practice of finishing people off. They get good positions, but run short of time and bail out to the draw.

Just a part of the price of playing without digital clocks and increments.

Increments prevent you from running out of time ( whis is, I agree, a good thing ). Increments do not prevent you from running short of time. I find an extended period of playing every move under a time guillotine the most stressful and unpleasant form of chess I have ever encountered.

NickFaulks wrote:I find an extended period of playing every move under a time guillotine the most stressful and unpleasant form of chess I have ever encountered.

Of course every move in a game without increments is played "under a time guillotine", just that initially it is rather a long "time guillotine". Presumably it is not a time guillotine so much as an immanent time guillotine.

In one of his excellent recent chess videos Simon Williams gives the very good tip that you should play obvious moves (such as your prepared opening) relatively quickly so that later in the game you have time to spare for a long think or two. Similarly you will find when playing on the increment that some of your moves are obvious and you can play them within a few seconds. A few such moves and you will find that you are no longer playing under an immanent time guillotine. You merely need to learn to manage your time better in the later stages of the game.

Brian Towers wrote: You merely need to learn to manage your time better in the later stages of the game.

Thanks, I'll bear that in mind.

I have cut down my draw percentage to about 60%, by not offering very short , say less than twenty move, draws.

One route to happily reducing draws is to enjoy playing unbalanced, if equal, endgames.