At one of the state scholastics, a TD went to a player giving a note to inform him that his parents needed to leave for an event and he needed to accompany them. After the player (in a better position) looked at the note he caught the TD by surprise by simply agreeing to the draw offer that happened to currently be on the table, and could do so because he had not already verbally declined the offer.
If my opponent is on the move when he offers a draw, I will say “Make a move and I will consider it.”
If he offers a draw properly as Bill described, then no immediate reply is needed. I will say “I accept” or I will make my move, which effectively declines the draw offer.
If I am on the move when the draw is offered. I will be at the very least annoyed for having my concentration broken, and if I am in time trouble or it is a repeat offender, I will call over the TD to ask for an additional two minutes.
Sometimes it’s the 3rd or 4th draw offer when I’m in a winning position (always against young scholastic kids, I want to strangle their coaches), and then I just ignore it.
I used to not respond to draw offers until I accepted them or made a move, but then I learned that some people found this rude (plus it is nice to have confirmation that the opponent has heard your offer), so now I immediately say “I’ll consider it.”
My offering procedure is the same as Bill Smythe’s: I make my move, calmly say “I offer a draw”, and press the clock, with no indication that I expect my opponent to respond any time soon.
In my last tournament I asked someone who made an offer without moving to first make a move, and felt like kind of a jerk about it, since his position had been better all game, and at this point we were basically repeating moves. But it is the rule, and if he was irritated in the moment he had gotten over it by the time I apologized to him the next day.
The worst draw etiquette I’ve seen was when a kid (under ten) was playing a middle-aged man, and the kid had had an advantage for most of the game but it had fizzled out. The kid sighed something like “It’s a draw” to himself under his breath (it was clearly not intended as an offer), and milliseconds later the man leaped up and said “I ACCEPT!” Tears were shed. Unfortunately I don’t remember what the TD eventually ruled.
You had nothing to apologize about. You have every right to see his move first.
On the other hand, if your opponent offers a draw without moving, you still have the right to accept the offer without waiting, if you wish.
Bill Smythe
You do, but I always ask him to make the move first. Not only is it possible he will do something incredibly stupid, I also figure I am doing him a favor by making sure he learns the rules in an non-threatening situation. Otherwise it may bite him some day. I have had opponents thank me for teaching them the rule.
As would I, ceteris paribus.
I think the textbook phrase is, “Volete un pareggio?” (Disclaimer: I’m not an Italian. I don’t even play one on TV.)
Thank you, Boyd. Wikipedia is my friend; I’m simply going to ask “Patta?” if the need arises. Given the strength of the field and my initial standing in it, I’ll be fortunate to have the opportunity to credibly pose the question tomorrow, let alone tonight.
I read somewhere that the French word “Remis” is universally understood as a draw offer in Europe. That may or may not be true, but it is certainly true that a higher percentage of Europeans are multilingual than you’d find in America.
It has always been the custom, proper etiquette, decorum, and courtesy to make some acknowledgement that you have received a draw offer by an opponent by making some response in return. In the quiet of a tournament room it is possible that the player offering the draw was not heard. If you merely sit there in your boorish silence, he may feel compelled to offer the draw louder which will likely disturb others. A simple, quiet, generic response of, “Let me think about it,” lets the other player know that he has been heard. He can now sit and wait for the acceptance or declining of the draw, or he may then get up to walk around, stretch, get a cup of coffee, or go to the loo while the Buddha ponders his navel. I was taught a long time ago that the proper etiquette in polite society, even in the rough and tumble of tournament chess, that if someone asks you a question, it is necessary and proper to respond in some kind. The rules allow you to be an impolite jerk, but it is not necessary to follow that to the letter. It is also the proper etiquette to then wait for the Buddha to make his decision and respond by word or move that he accepts or declines the offer rather than get up to walk around, stretch, get a cup of coffee, or go to the loo, but that is what people often do after a while when the Buddha sits in his ponderous silence doing nothing. I have noticed that the players who do not make any response to draw offers often allow their time, sometimes as much as an hour, to run out rather than resign in lost positions, but that is a rudeness for another day.
In several games with European players, I have been offered a draw with the word “remis”. This does seem to be a universal word to offer a draw. I was also once offered a draw by a player writing “=” on a small slip of player and sliding it over to me. I declined the offer by saying no, shaking my head, and making a line crossing over the “=”. He smiled, shrugged and we played on. In the post mortem in the hotel bar, we did not understand each other’s language, but still were able to explore the game and have a beer, such is the universal quality of chess.
.
The annoyance is the fault of the poorly engineered rules for how to offer a draw.
The rules could specify that a nonverbal signal for offering a draw be used. I am unsure why they do not, except that people hate change.
Any player should have the legal, ethical, and practical right to offer a draw as often as he likes (after respecting special rules like no draw offers allowed before move-pair 40 is completed etc). Because currently there is a practical limit due to human annoyance, the current rule is to blame.
Also, it should be easy offer a draw immediately before you press your clock, even if the opponent is away from the board. Again, that this is currently impossible is the fault of the rule makers.
The current rule on how to offer a draw is obnoxious. Blame your annoying opponent if you must, but also blame the rule makers.
.
OK Gene, I’ll bite. If you were the newly appointed Czar of draw offers, what rule change would you make to remedy the situation (I hesitate to label it a “problem”)?
I don’t understand why bright chess players can’t figure out reasonable answers to problems that aren’t covered by the rulebook.
-
A nonverbal signal for offering a draw? Why? Who doesn’t understand the procedure already given for offering a draw? What is the problem with the current rule?
-
And also after respecting rules that declare annoying behavior prohibited.
-
If your opponent is away from the board, and you don’t know how to offer a draw, you should check your common sense smarts. OK, I’ll give you a hint: seek out the TD.
Shake for “no” and nod for “yes” is indeed almost universal. The major exceptions are Greece, Macedonia, Bulgaria, and Albania.
The problem is determining if the gesture was a response at all. Since a player is not required to respond to a draw offer, I don’t think it is fair to interpret any action that would be normal absent the draw offer to be a response to the draw offer, and non-directed gestures (including head nodding and shaking) are quite normal for many players when they are thinking about the position.
This doesn’t apply to a spoken response, because it is not normal for players to talk out loud to themselves while considering the position, and so someone saying “no” or “yes” while a draw offer is open can reasonably be interpreted as a response.
In fact, head shaking and nodding while thinking is so common I’d like to see the rules explicitly forbid using those gestures to communicate acceptance or rejection of a draw offer.
Even in the case where the players do not speak a common language, and so you might expect a non-verbal response to a draw offer, there are clearer ways than head gestures. Stopping the clock and offering a hand, for instance, would be a pretty clear indication that the player has accepted the draw offer. Rejecting the draw offer is even easier–just make your move and hit the clock.
Ideally chess clocks would get better and would enable nonverbal draw offers by clock features. This will be easy when eventually chess clocks become created more with computer software than with limited inflexible hard wiring.
In trying to think of other nonverbal mechanisms I once raised the idea of a “king ring” as a means to the end:
“King Ring” idea, on UsChess.org forums
http://www.uschess.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=18853
Dictionaries and semantics aside, I have heard or read many tales of chess players complaining about an opponent who bothered the player by offering a draw more often than the player wanted to hear the opponent speak it to him.
And, I doubt I am the only player who has wanted to offer a draw at the end of my turn only to see that my opponent was away from the board (in the bathroom or wandering around). In both cases I foolishly said “I offer a draw” into the empty air, just to be official I guess.
If ‘problem’ is too strong a word, fine. But some negative word is needed.
.
Again,
(a) Sometimes players complain that the current verbal mechanism is annoying when the opponent issues multiple draw offers; and
(b) Sometimes the opponent is not at the board when you are about to press your clock and you want to offer a draw, and you do not want to feel chained to your seat waiting for the opponent to return, and have him able to complain that you verbalized a draw offer to him during his clock time (which the rules explicitly frown on).
That the hassle to “seek out the TD” is the best available recommendation under the current rules only lends additional strength to my point.
It would be better to set a visible indicator at the board, so that it no longer matters whether the opponent is away from the board, and TD involvement is no longer necessary.
.
“Patta?” worked with my opponent in a dead drawn K+3P endgame this morning in the second round of the Lugano Open.
I’m 0.5/2, which is more than double my expected score calculated assuming a FIDE ELO equal to my USCF rating (and interestingly, the organizer is fully crediting my USCF rating without adjustment).
Sorry for the digression.
Good idea.
But let’s do it right – quickly, before some clock manufacturer comes out with a half-baked implementation of the idea.
The “draw offer” button should behave like the shift key on your computer. Pressing it by itself would have no effect, but pressing it in conjunction with another button would alter the effect of the other button.
Specifically:
To offer a draw, after making your move, you would press and hold your “draw offer” button, while then pressing and releasing your regular button stopping your clock and starting the opponent’s. Release your “draw offer” button only after you have pressed your regular button.
This implementation would have the advantage of forcing you to offer a draw properly – after you have moved but before you have pressed your clock.
Of course, there should be two “draw offer” buttons, one for each player – not a common button somewhere in the middle. Each player’s “draw offer” button should be close (but not too close) to his regular button, for easy one-handed operation.
There should also be a pair of “draw offer” lights, one for each player. Pressing your “draw offer” button would light up the opponent’s “draw offer” light. Or, instead of a light, an extra symbol such as “=?” could appear on the opponent’s clock display.
Thoughts?
Bill Smythe
“Eventually” was many years ago. Single chips that contain a microprocessor, RAM, ROM, non-volatile storage, and several input/output pins that can be used for both digital and analog control are so cheap that they have pretty much completely killed other approaches to these kind of systems.
Instead of going high tech, why not have a “draw” chip, a plastic poker chip with the word “draw” on one side and “remis” or a draw symbol like “=” on the other side? The player requesting a draw places may place it on the table, or maybe tosses it onto the board. Sliding or tossing it back to the other side is a rejection. Taking and holding on to the chip while stopping the clock would be an acceptance. This would avoid language barriers and not disturb the other players.