Draw Offer..odd scholastic situation

Running Chess Tournaments
41

So then can I assume that you can’t find any specific language about intent being necessary in this situation.

In general, tds should avoiding trying to judge intent (a definite minefield that I don’t want to enter) and from what I can remember, there is only one area where the rulebook which specifically considers the issue - whether a piece was touched accidentally or not. For that case, there is a specific section dealing with the necessity to consider whether it was an accident. Barring something similar in the rulebook relevant to this case, I would assume that the we should be ruling based upon what actions the players took and not try to figure out what their intent is. I don’t think that you should assume that intent is necessary in this situation - if it was they would have added something to the rulebook to that effect just like they did for the touched piece. The fact that they didn’t would seem to me to imply that intent should be ignored and we should make rulingsbased just upon what was done.

While the rulebook told us that pieces can be touched accidentally, the fact that they don’t say that draws can be offered accidentally implies to me that they can’t be from the standpoint of the td.

42

That is very concise and insightful. Best I’ve heard.

43

My thoughts exactly! If your opponent says something to you it’s far better to ask him to repeat what he said. Saying “do you want a draw?” is just asking for trouble if you don’t want a draw.

44

Gentlemen,

Aren’t tournament rules crystal clear that a player should at no time during the game speak to their opponent except to offer a draw, to resign or to stop the clock and make a claim? Isn’t that one of the first things you are supposed to teach children, that chess is a game of thinking and not talking?

There is simply no reason for a player to say the d-word unless they are offering a draw (or claiming a draw). If the d-word is said, that is a draw offer. If the r-word is said, that is a resignation. Otherwise don’t say it until the game is over! Period.

Michael Aigner

45

Michael,

You read my mind.

In fact that is the rule in the IHSA (state of Illinois chess). You utter the D-word for any reason it is a draw offer.

Tim

46

Tim, let’s get a TD Tip put in under the Draw Offer sections to reflect this common practice. Would you sponsor that for a vote at the next delegate’s meeting? Or can a TD Tip be decreed?

47

Player A says to player B “you want a draw?” Player B says “yes, agreed.” Player A can’t then say that he was just asking a question, and doesn’t want a draw. The question becomes an offer. This is a typical situation where player A, in this hypothetical, gains information on his opponent’s mindset, and in my opinion is cheating.

48

I certainly hope this isn’t another rule that goes to a delagates vote. IMO, delegates (esp. those who aren’t TDs) aren’t exactly independant and knowledgable enough to make decisions on rules - everyone simply votes their own subjective ideas, much like what happened with the 15A crap. Whatever became of the Rules Committee? Shouldn’t they be the ones to develop and interpret the rules?

The TD Tip, I guess, is okay, but I’d hope that this situation would be considered a draw offer, even though I agree that might not have been the player’s intent. “Be careful what you ask for” has been a long time cautionary statement in chess.

49

FYI: TD TIPs are not rules. They do not need delegate approval. They are not binding in any way whatsoever.

Tim

50

In fact, many TDs would probably rule that a statement like “I am not offering a draw, but are you playing for a draw?” is a draw offer. Or, for that matter, even “I am not offering a draw, but are you playing for a win?”. The reason is clear: By asking such a question, a player is pumping his opponent for information he’s not entitled to have. If you want to find out whether your opponent wants a draw, simply offer a draw and take your chances.

Bill Smythe

51

The rule book gives a procedure for offering a draw. (1. move, 2. offer, 3. press clock). Nowhere does it specify the exact wording of the offer. Also if you don’t follow these steps, but still utter the D word, the opponent still has the option of taking the draw.

Moral of the story: Speaking too soon, may end the game too soon. Loose lips, sink ships. :stuck_out_tongue:

52

fpawn,
Part of the description of THIS case is that the player WASN’T talking to his opponent. Does that not matter?

ppwchess,
ANY use of the word draw is an offer? Even if he were talking to somebody ELSE? I admit the “talking to himself” would be hard for a director to determine, but it was the only evidence presented in the description.

But let’s go ahead and take this to the extreme. You wouldn’t say he was offering a draw to his opponent if he had been asking a DIFFERENT player (perhaps a teammate for a team competition) about HIS (the teammate’s) game, would you? Just because his opponent happened to overhear the conversation, that wouldn’t make this question an OFFER. Perhaps this isn’t done so much in individual-team competitions, but it was a fairly common practice in pure team competitions to ask about the progress of your teammate’s games.

It’s all a matter of where you draw the line. IMHO, saying that ANY use of the word “draw” is an offer just doesn’t sound reasonable. I think this is an extreme position that just doesn’t make any sense at all. How could you say that the phrase “I decline your draw offer”, for example, is a draw offer? That appears to be the nonsensical position people are taking.

53
54

Tim,
I’ll answer your questions, but then I’d like you to answer the questions I wrote!

It seems to me that there are some clear examples of what IS a draw offer and what is NOT. I’ll even accept some of the more ambiguous sounding phrases as being real draw offers. But I think you HAVE to take context into account! Any claim to the contrary seems ludicrous. By making this claim and sticking to it, you are turning yourself into a parody of a tournament director.

I’ll agree we should accept the following as clear draw offers when a player looks at his opponent and says to him:
“Would you like a draw?”
“Are you playing for a draw?”
“Draw?” or even
“Are you playing for a win?”

IMHO, we should accept that these are clear cases where a draw is NOT being offered:

  1. When being offered a draw, a player responds in one of these ways:
    “I decline your draw offer.”
    “No, it’s not a drawn position” or “it’s not a draw” or even
    “Draw!? NO WAY!”
    The context that is important in these cases is that this is a RESPONSE to a draw offer, not an initiation of a draw offer. Also, the other words being spoken are clearly a REFUSAL of the draw offer, not an acceptance.

  2. When speaking to another player in the tournament (not his own opponent), the player asks him about his (the other player’s) game:
    “Is it a draw?”
    “Did you get a draw” or even
    “Do you want a draw?”
    The context that is important here is that the words are not addressed to his opponent. Friends frequently ask each other about how they are doing, especially if they are teammates. Of course, you shouldn’t go LOOK at your friends game and THEN ask him a leading question, but that’s a different rules problem than what we’re discussing here.

Now, I’ll admit that the post that started this thread falls into a rather more ambiguous area, but the description that we have here (which is admittedly one-sided) makes it sound more like these two situations – he was repsonding to a draw offer that his opponent had made and his response was not directed TO his opponent but to himself. But I’ll readily admit that the director might have made the best decision he could when presented with an ambiguous case and conflicting testimony. (further supporting the interpretation that this was NOT a draw offer, is the fact that the player IMMEDIATELY denied that he was offering a draw – given that the situation was rather ambiguous, this should be given some weight, unlike cases where the original offer was unambiguously made).

IMHO, there were three examples of problem behavior presented in the original discussion and NONE of them involved an attempt to withdraw a real draw OFFER:

  1. A draw offer was made before a serious contest had been made of the game.
  2. A player behaved with very poor sportsmanship toward his opponent by mocking his draw request.
  3. A player tried to claim a draw offer had been made when he knew very well that wasn’t his opponent’s intent. Maybe the TD that came to the scene afterwards couldn’t read the player’s minds and determine whether this was REALLY a draw offer, but you’ll not convince me that the other player didn’t know very well that he hadn’t been offered a draw!

IMO, you’re mis-focusing your efforts in this example. All three of these behaviors are more serious than simply one ambiguous example of speech that a player shouldn’t have uttered.

55

Neither one of us is going to change the other’s mind. I think the game is a draw, you do not. We can both spend our efforts doing better things than this.

Tim

BTW: Can I get a caricature to go along with that parody?

56

Let’s examine this more closely.

[With]in the first ten moves, player A had offered a draw which player B declined. No problems here.

After about five more moves, player B utters the words “you want a draw?” Player A “immediately said yes.” Player A then said “i was not offering you a draw.” At this point the TD was called over to rule.

OK! The above has intentionally been taken out of the context of what was originally posted. I did this because the witness to all of this was an interested party, player B’s father. Please understand that I am not representing player B’s father as a dishonest person, only that he is an interested, biased party to the above. His testimony cannot be introduced. The original post did not say anything about impartial witnesses. What does this leave us?

Clearly, the TD needs to speak with both players in order to arrive at what happened. The TD will need to determine the credibility of the players. Apparently, he did so and ruled the game a draw.

Here’s my question: If you, as a TD, are called upon to make a determination in this situation, throwing out the testimony of the father, since he’s an interested party, there being no other impartial witnesses, how do you rule? Remember, you didn’t see what happened, you didn’t see player B smirking, hear him talking to himself, you didn’t witness the mocking that was said to have occured. How do you get to the truth, and what’s your verdict?

57

Well, I would take into account that player B COULD have simply lied and said he’d never said the words in the first place. That would tend to add credibility.

I might still rule against him and call the game a draw.

BUT, if the context (as reported in the initial thread) were clearly established then I probably wouldn’t call this a draw.

58

We’re talking about a game in the K-3 section. When two kids at that level disagree, it’s almost impossible to know what really happened. I can almost picture it.

TD - "Did you offer a draw?
Player - “Yes, but I didn’t mean it.”
TD - “Then why did you say ‘do you want a draw’?”
Player - [shrugs] “I don’t know.”
TD - “Well, if you offer a draw, you can’t take it back. I’m going to have to rule in favor of your opponent.”

Obviously the above dialogue is purely hypothetical. However, since none of us were there, I think you have to give the TD the benefit of the doubt even if you believe his statement in and of itself doesn’t constitute a draw offer.

59 
In that case, how about this then?

PROCEDURE FOR OFFERING AND ACCEPTING A DRAW

(From U.S. Chess Forum Chess Rulebook, Scholastic Section, Chapter 237 ("Making Sure Everybody Feels Happy and Knows What They Are Doing"), pp. 2,438):

"A lot of players, parents and, [i]especially[/i] NON-SCHOLASTIC Tournament Directors are evidently confused over the correct way to offer a draw during a scholastic game, and the correct way to accept a draw.  The following procedure will help eliminate any confusion and misunderstanding regarding a game ending in a draw.

1. If a player wishes to offer his opponent a draw, he must ask the opponent:  "Do you want a draw?"

2. If the opponent thinks he might like a draw, too, or if he is not sure yet if does or not, he must respond with: "Maybe I do, and maybe I don't."  The player may rescind the offer at this point,  because: i.) he was only asking if the opponent wanted a draw, and ii.) The opponent was only maybe agreeing to it.  The game would then continue.  However, if the player wishes to pursue the draw offer, he must then follow up by asking: "Do you know yet if you want a draw?"

3. The opponent is then required to determine if the player is really serious about the draw offer, or if he is only joking around.  The opponent's correct response is: "Are you SURE you REALLY mean to offer me a draw, or are you just acting goofy?"  At this point, either player can forget about the draw, and the game would continue.

4.  However, if the player STILL thinks he wants to offer a draw, he then continues, "Yes!  I REALLY mean it!  DO you want a draw?"  (Be careful NOT to say "Don't you want a draw?!" or the entire draw offer process is automatically voided under the "Ambiguous Question Rule" (pp. 2,360-2,377), and must be started over, with the words "DO you want a draw?" used in Step 4).  At this point, either player may take back the draw, and the game, of course, will continue.

 5. Now the opponent should understand that at this point, the player is probably more serious about wanting to offer a draw.  But just to make sure he doesn't misunderstand what the player really means, the opponent  must still follow up by asking: "Do you SWEAR you mean to offer a draw?"  At this point, either player may take back their words, and the game would continue.

 6. But if the player says, "Yes, I SWEAR I want to offer you a draw!" then the offer is now officially on the table.  Once the player swears that he meant to offer the draw all along, he can only take it back now by telling the Tournament Director, "I'm only a little kid, and I didn't really understand what I was saying."  Of course, the opponent can still decline the draw at any time, and the game continues.

7.  If the Tournament Director agrees with the player, however, then the opponent may elect to continue the draw offer process.  To do this, he MUST ask one last time, "Do you PINKY SWEAR that you want a draw?"   BE CAREFUL!  ONCE THE PLAYERS PINKY SWEAR to a draw offer, THERE IS NO WAY TO TAKE THE DRAW OFFER BACK!!

See also "How To Make SURE Your Opponent REALLY Means To Resign" ("The Correct Way To Resign A Game," pp. 2,350-2,359)

 NOTE to Tournament Organizers:  In order to account for the additional time necessary to properly make and accept a draw offer, it is recommended that you allow an additional 30-45 minutes for each round, when determining your tournament schedules."
60

I think most of us would agree with you so far.

Again, I think most of us would agree.

The trouble occurs when the original poster claims, "He said…talking to himself…not even looking at his opponent…in a laughing mocking way … ". Most of us probably feel this claim is unlikely, or at least that it needs to be supported by better evidence than a simple claim by a coach or parent who has a vested interest and who probably wasn’t even in the tournament room at the time.

Bill Smythe