at a local NYC scholastic tournament with over 200 participants…i had a student playing in the K-3 championship section, he is rated about 900.
In the first 10 moves of the game his oppponent offered him a draw. needing a win to secure an individual prize as well a to help his team he declined.
5 moves or so later…my student wins his opponent’s queen…and did something i do not approve of yet am still confused about. He said…talking to himself…not even looking at his opponent…in a laughing mocking way "you want a draw? and smirked as if. His opponent immediately said yes.
my student said i was not offering you a draw. a TD was called over and after finding out that my student did say the words listed above…even if in a mocking way ruled the draw offer as valid…
My question is simple…what do other tds think of this situation?
I was upset b/c my student may have been rude…however, he never really wanted a draw and had just won his opponent’s queen the move before all this.
I suspose that the TD would have to decide if there was actually a draw offer made or if it was just very poor sportsmanship by the kid who won the queen. I would be very tempted to rule it a valid draw offer just to punish the kid but wonder if he would get the correct message. I think I would have let the kid win for rating purposes but fined him a half point for poor sportsmanship, splitting the point for tournament score purposes. We have a problem with poor sportsmanship as well as cheating and both have to be vigoriously discouraged.
Regards, Ernie
The posts here don’t seem consistent with what I’ve seen in previous threads. I seem to remember a thread that included comments on the question “are you playing for a draw?” that indicated this was not a draw offer.
“you want a draw?” seems like a very similar question to me…
EDIT: It looks like I was wrong on this, now that I’ve had time to go back and look. Still I think it’s a bit of a stretch to rule that words from a player, who may have only been talking to himself, constitute a draw OFFER. It certainly doesn’t seem to be an AGREEMENT to a draw, which is what the rulebook would require.
While we’re lecturing the one child on good sportsmanship, you might want to lecture the other one also. It’s not appropriate to agree to a draw before a serious contest of the game. This applies to kids as well as GMs. Maybe if we make enough of a point of it to the kids, we’ll see fewer GM draws after they grow up…
Is saying the word “resign” also irrevocable? What if a player says “you should resign” and the opponent misunderstands it to mean “I resign”? Do you rule that the first player did resign?
If “draw” and “resign” are treated differently, then please explain.
While I cannot find in the rules where words said or actual intent is more important. Certainly, a draw cannot be based upon:
14B. Agreement. The game is drawn upon agreement between the two players. This immediately ends the game…
That begs the question Shaun80 raises. What about disagreement?
I would be very disinclined to rule a draw based upon words said only, even as taunting, versus intent. However, depending upon the eye contact and ability of the opponent to understand the offending player, this certainly was unsportsmanlike behavior.
To penalize a 1/2 point for being a smart-mouthed third-grader (or younger!) is not something I would be comfortable with. I just don’t think it is serious enough.
I would be very careful because of 21K2. Beware abuse of power. Tournament directors should realize that the powers given to them under these rules should be used sparingly, to restore equity or to penalize a serious infraction so as to discourage its recurrence. No one’s interests are served by what appears to be the arbitrary or high-handed exercise of authority. See also 1C2, Director discretion; and 13I, Refusal to obey rules.
Certainly whatever the TD determines is unlikely to be reversed.
What you are saying amounts to a double standard for kids versus adults. I am extremely uncomfortable with this. Certainly if an adult player said something like “Do you still want a draw?” “Yes.” “Well, I don’t, heh, heh,” the draw offer would stand. (There are several precedents for this, but I don’t feel like naming names.) If you excuse a kid for this because he doesn’t know any better, why should he be expected to follow any of the other rules?
Funny, I remember being in a tournament where a player asked his opponent "Are you playing for a win?" and the opponent said "I accept the draw." The TD (now dead) said that was a valid draw offer by the player, which the opponent accepted."
Imagine the disputes you would have if "Do you want a draw?!" were [i]not[/i] tantamount to a draw offer:
"Yeah, I did ask him if he wanted a draw-- so what!? I didn't [i]intend[/i] to really offer him a draw, I only wanted to find out if he [i]wanted[/i] one-- because I don't!"
"Yeah, so what if I [i]offered[/i] a draw-- can you prove I really [i]intended[/i] to offer it?!"
Your example for adults is exactly right. But kids muttering a slam under their breath is not the same thing. Was the kid addressing the opponent? Not from what I gather from the first post. I am not excusing the kid for not knowing any better, I am saying that he is guilty of unsportsmanlike conduct and that that should be dealt with. Not the alleged draw offer.
And, not to change the subject, but there are many double standards in rules enforcement at scholastic tournaments. Care to discuss those?
My son found himself in a similar situation about a dozen years ago. The TD at that time did NOT let the taunting player take back his draw offer, and my son took the draw. There was a non-involved witness (player on the next board) who heard the draw offer.
For the record, I think this was the right decision. We don’t let a player say “I resign” and then take it back, saying he was only kidding, and I don’t think “Do you want a draw?” should be retractable, either. Tone of voice is a difficult thing to judge, and kids are especially bad at making such judgements.
There is some disagreement on that thread as to what the “Scholastic version” of 15A really is. In any case, those “Scholastic Council” rule variations are binding only on national scholastics, though of course others may choose to adopt them. Under no circumstances would I, as a TD, rule differently because of a player’s age, sex, ethnicity or mental condition. One rule for all. That’s what chess is all about.
I don’t know about you, but sometimes when I’ve offered a draw I’ve used the very words “You want a draw?” Other times I’ve simply said “draw?”. When I’m being very formal I will say “I offer you a draw.” Though I think I often make the draw offer in question form when I’m slightly worse, and not convinced the opponent will accept.
I’ve made interesting observation on kids being sensative to intent. Sometimes when I resign I stop the clock, say “Good game.” and shake hands with the opponent. When I do this with adults they immediately understand that I’ve resigned. If I do this with a kid under the age of 16 9 out of 10 times he will ask me what I meant by that. At that point I either tip over the king, or say “I’m resigning.” I think kids have been taught the finer points of 13B regarding resignation.
The hypothetical statements you’ve offered don’t sound that close to the reported situation. Not being witnesses, all we have to consider HERE is the description we were offered:
This doesn’t sound like a draw offer to ME. It doesn’t sound like he was even talking to his opponent – more like muttering in incredulity that somebody would think he could get a draw when about to lose a queen. It doesn’t sound like he’s asking his opponent if he wants a draw, but instead is commenting (to himself) that his opponent HAD wanted (and offered) a draw. Admittedly, this is something that would be hard for a TD to judge in the tournament, but with only the description furnished here it sounds clear. For it to have been a draw offer it would have had to be addressed to the opponent.
What if a player offers his opponent a draw and the opponent immediately says “you want a draw?”. This question is clearly not a draw OFFER but a question about the draw offer that had already been made (maybe he didn’t clearly understand the offer or couldn’t believe he’d be “offered” a draw when winning a queen). I certainly wouldn’t rule that such a question was the same as agreeing to a draw. The case reported here sounds more like that than the examples Steve gave.
I haven’t really sensed that type of tone here, Terry. It seems instead that some think the player should be penalized - at the very least, for poor sportsmanship - and a half point may be just what the player ordered, for as Tim says, be careful what you ask for.
However, when I posted my first reply agreeing with Ernie, I failed to read thoroughly the opening post, and did not take in the “… He said…talking to himself…not even looking at his opponent…” part of the question. I can probably agree that this was not a true offer, but rather an insulting sarcastic remark. Nevertheless, a half-point penalty wouldn’t seem too harsh to me. Note that while I might not rule this way, myself, I don’t think I would overrule another TD in this situation.
And, btw: the “are you playing for a win” part that I’ve seen quoted here, is a TD’s method of ruling on 14H claims (14H5). It’s not a question that players are encouraged to ask of their opponents.
We, as TDs, must not only be fair but also accurate. If a TD rules in this case that the game is a draw because he wishes to penalize the player for poor sportsmanship and tells the players it is a draw because he made a draw offer then he is not being fair or accurate. That ruling would likely crush the offending player who would feel like he had been cheated.
However, if the correct penalty is assessed under Rule 20A, 21D3. Warning players. Warning players about or penalizing players for disruptive, unethical, or unsportsmanlike behavior… then justice is served and the player understands his penalty is due to his smart mouth. Not by saying the word “draw”, which in this case, certainly was not an offer.
It is in the purview of 21K2 to award a 1/2 point without a warning first, in my opinion. I am around these “3U types” plenty and while I want them all to exhibit good sportsmanship it still must be done fairly and not with a heavy hand.