More often than not, the player offering the draw will have his/her hand extended over the board and up in the face of the opponent in an attempt to get a handshake. That is so not right, as it is pressuring the opponent to accept, while the opponent has all the time he wants (or has on the clock) to accept or reject the draw. It also blocks the opponent’s view of the board. Do coaches teach this rude and incorrect behavior?
You are correct.
I can’t recall now (~40 years ago) if my friend had even punched the clock before his opponent offered a draw–however it happened he erred by accepting it at once. Certainly saying “make your move first,” or “let’s see your move” after punching his clock would have been better than what he did.
I am reluctant to penalize a player for behavior which only hurts himself. Reminds me of that line from A Funny Thing Happened On The Way To The Forum – “'Tis a crime against Roman law to take your own life. The penalty’s death.”
I had an opponent offer me a draw before making his move. I told him to make his move first. He then found a move that wins the exchange. I had not seen the move when I originally asked him to move first. After he made the move I accepted his draw offer. He didn’t want the draw any more, but it was too late to retract it.
Moral of the story, make your move first, offer the draw, and press you clock right after the offer.
A minor point, but a key one nevertheless-I instruct my chess students to always ask their
opponent who has a hand stretched over the board, exactly what it is they are in agreement of
before they shake hands. It is not uncommon for a player getting trounced to “offer a draw”
without any statement, and a “loss” to be accepted without any comment. Which naturally
creates controversy, easily avoided by the simple question above.
I see that some in this thread were on the floor in Nashville.
On the original topic (“why did the TD make the wrong initial decision?”) - it’s a good practice to occasionally take a brand new rulebook and a highlighter and read straight through it - highlighting everything that “surprises” you. The Local TD test essentially forces new TDs to do this - but experienced TDs should do it from time to time, too.
On the topic of “the hand” - this is very common in elementary-school chess. Some of it is gamesmanship by the players, some of it is (alas) taught by coaches - but a lot of it is just a mix-up in the head of the kid who has been told that he must shake hands at the end of every game.
The best way to cure this is for TD’s at local events (please…it should not persist to the Nationals!) to rule that a silent outstretched hand is a RESIGNATION. There is support for this in the rulebook. I confess that I have never actually ruled that way - but I have often mentioned this while talking to both players when it comes up. 95% of the time, when I say “sticking your hand out without saying anything is a resignation”, the eyes of the miscreant open wide in fear! And, I’ve never seen a player do it again (at least not in one of my events).
Since this is just after Nationals, and the events there are fresh in everyone’s mind - let me make the point that kids’ minds (and by this I include EVERY player at Nashville - even the 12th graders) simply do not work the same way that adult minds do. Actions taken by kids are not nearly as “evil” as they might appear to an adult observer. When they do something wrong, it’s necessary to correct them - but it’s not necessary to conclude that they were (necessarily) “cheating”.
When resigning against a kid, if I don’t knock the king over or very clearly say “I resign”, I have been asked what exactly I was doing. Kids are even afraid adults might being going for the stealth draw offer.
I listen to music when I play, so sometimes I’ll be oblivious to draw offers/comments directed at me. I’ve constantly worried about opponents trying to pull a quick one, and so I tend to take an earbud out whenever the game seems like it’s coming to a close. To this date, I’ve not had any issues with “stealth draws”, but considering some of the past few posts, I’m probably going to adopt this practice
I’ve seen an adult storm out of a tournament because he thought his opponent was resigning in a lost position. Unfortunately for him, several independent witnesses heard his opponent softly say “draw?” as he extended his hand. Personally, I think both men showed poor sportsmanship and would have benefited from this advice.
I had that happen on Sunday. My opponent offered a draw, but I didn’t hear it since I was listening to my music. He offered again a few moves later. I knew he was asking me something, so I removed the earbuds and asked “What?” He replied “Do you want a draw?” Since he had big lead on the clock, and a slightly better ending I accepted.
Even so, the TD could reasonably (and probably should) rule that there was no meeting of the minds, therefore the resignation / draw agreement never happened, therefore the game is still in progress. Set the pieces back up, guys, and keep playing.
Agreed - the obvious evidence being that a player who immediately protests he did NOT agree to a draw, and who has a clearly winning position, ought be presumed truthful. The opponent claiming an agreed draw when he is losing should always be suspect.
True – which is why ruling there was no meeting of the minds, and that the game must continue, usually works well. Whichever player is making the preposterous claim (even if the TD doesn’t yet know which player that was) will get his due.
