In a USCF class tournament game, white offers a draw. Black deliberates a while, picks up a piece to move it, and then, realizing any move with that piece would cost the game, places it back on its initial square and accepts the draw offer. White says the draw offer is no longer valid, it is touch move.
White acknowledges offering a draw but insists it is touch move. Black acknowledges touching the piece but insists it is a draw by agreement. Your job is to rule on these competing claims.
Actually I am no longer a certified TD, nor do I have a copy of the latest USCF rulebook, so am unqualified to give the answer. I can however relate what happened next …
Our very experienced TD (R.I.P.) first ruled the game was a draw by agreement. White protested, and since the first line of appeal is the rulebook, the TD consulted the then-current 4th edition and proceeded to reverse his decision, ruling it was touch-move. This time Black protested, and so it proceeded to appeals committee. After that I don’t know what happened. Starting with white’s draw offer and continuing up to this point I had been a silent but interested observer. However, during the appeals committee’s deliberation I unfortunately stopped being silent. One of the committee members correctly objected to my interference, so I took his suggestion and left.
Did you think that one was too easy? Then here’s a bonus question:
If our very experienced TD’s final decision was touch-move, then why in the world did he initially rule it a draw? What was he thinking?
Rule 14B1 …The opponent may accept the proposal or may reject it either orally or by deliberately touching a piece. (Emphasis mine.)
Note that the wording does not say the opponent must determine or complete the move. So, as soon as the player touched the piece with the intention to move, he rejected the draw offer. His only recourse at that point was to determine his move, offer a draw, and hope his opponent still was agreeable.
Perhaps he mistakingly thought that the player should have determined or completed his move, instead of simply touching it, as I infer RGrove’s answer to cover.
Yes, the TD had too much experience. Under FIDE rules (10.10), and at least through the first couple of USCF rulebooks (the red rulebook and the gold rulebook), the draw offer is rejected by “completing a move”. At least, that was still true as of the 1989 FIDE rulebook.
I must admit that before this incident I didn’t know 14B1 and thought completing the move was required. And at that time I was a certified TD.
If there is any lesson here, it is that being a TD is an open book test. The only harm in reviewing the rulebook is that it makes you appear indecisive, which may invite an appeal. But reversing yourself virtually guarantees an appeal. It’s always best to take your time and gather all the facts. With rare claims, you should probably consult the rulebook, then deliberate, before rendering a decision. (Of course, if you actually wrote the rulebook then different standards apply.)
I suspect the longer one has been a TD, the more likely the TD’s first impulse would be to declare the game a draw.
If you go back to previous editions of the rulebook, you won’t find a lot on the mechanics of accepting a draw offer, but you will find statements to the effect that a draw offer cannot be withdrawn.
The current rulebook (and possibly the 4th edition, which I don’t have handy) made it clear that deliberately touching a piece is a rejection of the draw offer.
Article 9: The drawn game
9.1 A player wishing to offer a draw shall do so after having made a move on the chessboard and before stopping his clock and starting the opponent`s clock. An offer at any other time during play is still valid, but Article 12.6 must be considered. No conditions can be attached to the offer. In both cases the offer cannot be withdrawn and remains valid until the opponent accepts it, rejects it orally, rejects it by touching a piece with the intention of moving or capturing it, or the game is concluded in some other way.
The bold above is mine, and not Sevan’s or FIDE’s.
So… You offer a draw to your opponent before you start his clock. I’m with you so far. However, he’s not supposed to touch a piece until you’ve started his clock. This must mean that once you’ve offered the draw, you are free to start his clock (supposed to start his clock?), whether or not he’s replied to the draw offer, and the draw offer remains valid until he either responds verbally or touches a piece.
That draw offer could be on the table for quite a while. Or am I missing something?
The draw offer is part of a move, i.e. the offer should be made in conjunction with a move.
It’s as though you are stating (rather than asking), “With this move I offer a draw.”
Do not expect an immediate reply. Your opponent has the right to consider your offer, on his own clock time, up until the moment he deliberately touches a piece.
In fact, the wording suggested in 2. might even be preferable, as it could clarify the procedure for an opponent who is fuzzy on the rules.
A player who, after offering a draw, waits a while before pressing the clock, may be guilty of a (slight) breach of chess etiquette. It’s as though he is pressuring the opponent for an immediate response.
I really don’t blame a TD, even an NTD, for not knowing every detail of every rule in the book. After all, this situation doesn’t come up often. The important thing is, if you’re not sure, look it up first. The appearance of indecisiveness is hugely preferable to making an instant, and possibly incorrect, ruling and then having to wipe the egg off your face.
I have seen Bill Goichberg, in response to a request for a ruling, scratch his head and wait several seconds before finally making his ruling. This is an excellent technique, as it creates an aura of impartiality. By contrast, an instant ruling could create the impression that the TD knew who he was going to rule against even before he heard the question.
The moral of the story is a player can take his time pondering that draw offer, and an opponent who makes an offer needs to shut up and wait. So often, that’s not how it goes.
One of our top players once wrote an article for our state magazine called “The fatal draw offer”, in which he gave several games where a player turned down a draw offer and went on to make what turned out to be the losing move in the game in the next few moves.
Taking a while to respond to a draw offer is almost always a good idea.
Though it is no longer politically correct, the saying is still valid:
A friend in the late 60’s was trying to hold his own against a higher rated player and played a move which appeared to turn the game around. His opponent immediately offered a draw which was accepted(?). In going over the game (at least the final position) the higher rated player was surprised at a suggested move which kept the upper hand.
My friend blundered by not waiting until his next move to consider the offer. If the opponent had found the move which kept up the pressure, accept it–otherwise he could have played for the win without much risk.
Well, had he declined the offer, and the higher rated player then found the good move and played it, it’s too late to accept the offer, is it not, since he would have already declined it?
Unless I misunderstood, the point was that the opponent had offered a draw before making his move. The player could have said “make your move first,” and the draw offer would still be in force. However, it is true that if the player explicitly rejected the draw offer, it would have been too late. “Make your move first” keeps the option open.
I can however relate what happened next …