<Comment deleted by user>
@ILikeBlitz said in #62:
> @iHomba #58:
> Thank you for your reply. Unfortunately, it seems that you misunderstood my arguments.
> To begin with, you claim that "Your platitude that a tactical draw offer (and what draw offer is NOT tactical?) is "generally considered unfair among experienced players" is unsupportable nonsense."
> I have never claimed that a tactical draw offer would be generally considered unfair among experience players.
> I claim that a draw offer in a hopeless situation isn't forbidden but is generally considered unfair among experienced players, as one shouldn't intentionally distract the opponent in such a way. Not everything what is legal is fine. If you do not like the worlds "considered unfair", they can be replaced by "unwelcome".
> By mentioning a hopeless situation (rather than a hopeless position), I also took account of the clock. I agree that the case which you described in #55 is not a hopeless situation at some level, but offering draw in bad positions is also considered unfair unless there are some special reasons, like that your opponent is much weaker, has very little time left (without increment) or that a draw is enough for them to win a tournament or to fulfill other goal.
--------------
I don't disagree with any of this. Maybe you read my subsequent post in response to a second respondent to my original, where I distinguished harrassing, repeated draw offers (unsporting) from the idea of a (single) draw offer designed to push the opponent toward overconfidence. At my level, at least once out of every dozen games I will win after being a rook+ down (i.e. 5+ points worse) or lose from a similar advantageous position. So not hopeless, but I don't know where you draw the line at "bad position" - it is probaby different from my line, which is ok. I would not repeat the offer if things continued to go down hill for me. That would be churlish, for sure.
-------------
> I do not claim a moral superiority. I just claimed that it is generally considered unfair among experienced players. If you play over the board and keep offering draws in bad positions, the opponents probably will not like that, a few of them might tell you that it is wrong and most of the others would agree. It is not about my moral views, I just described the situation and the prevailing opinion. (True, the world is big and it is possible that some chess communities consisting of experienced players might view that differently.)
-------------
Ok. Again, your hearsay about other people's opinions is not emperically supportable, but I'll take your word for it in good faith as your lived experience. Everyone likes to cite, when arguing, that everyone else agrees with them. I think, when understood, my idea (which may be provacative at a quick reading) would be accepted as unobjectionable by most fairminded players. Also to note, I think it has helped my chances on occassion. The theoretical argument is sound, but emperically it is obviously unsupportable, I freely admit. No one can know what would have happened if I had not interjected the draw offer.
-------------
> I have never denied the importance of psychology in chess, but it is not about offering draws in poor positions. Alekhine thoroughly studied Capablanca's games before their match to find his weaknesses (overconfidence, laziness and occasional superficiality) and to exploit them in the match, choosing the right match strategy, shocking the opponent with a few wins and then using all his skills to overcome an extremely strong opponent who had not been ready for such a turn of the events. Tal often willingly played moves which were objectively not so good, but which led to positions where he felt better than the opponents, who would feel uncomfortable there. Both Alekhine and Tal (as well as other top players) used their fame to feel the opponents insecure and playing below their usual strength.
> Well, Alekhine once offered a draw to Euwe in a hopeless situation in the last game of their first WCh match, but Euwe had informed him before the game that he would accept a draw at any moment, as it would secure him the champion title. Many stories testify that Tal was a true chess gentleman.
> As for the game which I quoted in #56, I have played over 6000 online games and this was the only one where a titled player repeatedly offered me a draw in a hopeless position. You can imagine that I did not like it. That said, it is possible that the player knows that it is generally unwelcome among experienced players, yet sees that differently. Or maybe he simply disliked the fact that I played anonymously whereas he did not, and found such draw offers appropriate in that case. I do not know.
--------------
I am aware that Alekhine and Tal never spoke directly to psychological draw offers, but it is not inconsistent with their views of chess as a psychological fight, which I adopted in my youthful reading. Maybe the "overconfidence-heightening tactical draw offer" it is my invention, I did at least independently derive it for myself - if others have written of it, I have not read them.
I am flattered to have conversed with you, as I hold GMs in quite a high regard and can't recall ever having engaged at length with a GM. Thanks for the conversation and best wishes.
> @iHomba #58:
> Thank you for your reply. Unfortunately, it seems that you misunderstood my arguments.
> To begin with, you claim that "Your platitude that a tactical draw offer (and what draw offer is NOT tactical?) is "generally considered unfair among experienced players" is unsupportable nonsense."
> I have never claimed that a tactical draw offer would be generally considered unfair among experience players.
> I claim that a draw offer in a hopeless situation isn't forbidden but is generally considered unfair among experienced players, as one shouldn't intentionally distract the opponent in such a way. Not everything what is legal is fine. If you do not like the worlds "considered unfair", they can be replaced by "unwelcome".
> By mentioning a hopeless situation (rather than a hopeless position), I also took account of the clock. I agree that the case which you described in #55 is not a hopeless situation at some level, but offering draw in bad positions is also considered unfair unless there are some special reasons, like that your opponent is much weaker, has very little time left (without increment) or that a draw is enough for them to win a tournament or to fulfill other goal.
--------------
I don't disagree with any of this. Maybe you read my subsequent post in response to a second respondent to my original, where I distinguished harrassing, repeated draw offers (unsporting) from the idea of a (single) draw offer designed to push the opponent toward overconfidence. At my level, at least once out of every dozen games I will win after being a rook+ down (i.e. 5+ points worse) or lose from a similar advantageous position. So not hopeless, but I don't know where you draw the line at "bad position" - it is probaby different from my line, which is ok. I would not repeat the offer if things continued to go down hill for me. That would be churlish, for sure.
-------------
> I do not claim a moral superiority. I just claimed that it is generally considered unfair among experienced players. If you play over the board and keep offering draws in bad positions, the opponents probably will not like that, a few of them might tell you that it is wrong and most of the others would agree. It is not about my moral views, I just described the situation and the prevailing opinion. (True, the world is big and it is possible that some chess communities consisting of experienced players might view that differently.)
-------------
Ok. Again, your hearsay about other people's opinions is not emperically supportable, but I'll take your word for it in good faith as your lived experience. Everyone likes to cite, when arguing, that everyone else agrees with them. I think, when understood, my idea (which may be provacative at a quick reading) would be accepted as unobjectionable by most fairminded players. Also to note, I think it has helped my chances on occassion. The theoretical argument is sound, but emperically it is obviously unsupportable, I freely admit. No one can know what would have happened if I had not interjected the draw offer.
-------------
> I have never denied the importance of psychology in chess, but it is not about offering draws in poor positions. Alekhine thoroughly studied Capablanca's games before their match to find his weaknesses (overconfidence, laziness and occasional superficiality) and to exploit them in the match, choosing the right match strategy, shocking the opponent with a few wins and then using all his skills to overcome an extremely strong opponent who had not been ready for such a turn of the events. Tal often willingly played moves which were objectively not so good, but which led to positions where he felt better than the opponents, who would feel uncomfortable there. Both Alekhine and Tal (as well as other top players) used their fame to feel the opponents insecure and playing below their usual strength.
> Well, Alekhine once offered a draw to Euwe in a hopeless situation in the last game of their first WCh match, but Euwe had informed him before the game that he would accept a draw at any moment, as it would secure him the champion title. Many stories testify that Tal was a true chess gentleman.
> As for the game which I quoted in #56, I have played over 6000 online games and this was the only one where a titled player repeatedly offered me a draw in a hopeless position. You can imagine that I did not like it. That said, it is possible that the player knows that it is generally unwelcome among experienced players, yet sees that differently. Or maybe he simply disliked the fact that I played anonymously whereas he did not, and found such draw offers appropriate in that case. I do not know.
--------------
I am aware that Alekhine and Tal never spoke directly to psychological draw offers, but it is not inconsistent with their views of chess as a psychological fight, which I adopted in my youthful reading. Maybe the "overconfidence-heightening tactical draw offer" it is my invention, I did at least independently derive it for myself - if others have written of it, I have not read them.
I am flattered to have conversed with you, as I hold GMs in quite a high regard and can't recall ever having engaged at length with a GM. Thanks for the conversation and best wishes.
There is 1 more advantage if the position is more or less even. You offer draw. If the other denies it, you know he is trying to win and you are to accept any way of drawing. Then they may avoid the drawing lines and blunder because they are trying to win.
HOLA
thats a long post ihomba
I think the article deliberately and wrongly doesn't list all of the pros of offering a draw.
For starters, it's guaranteeing half a point can be more than just for ego and Elo, it can be the difference between winning cash at an event, qualifying for another tournament, or even getting a master norm. Without context on the players' situation, we can't know what is more important.
Second, a good use for offering a draw (that I have used in the past) is to save time and energy that could be more helpful in the next round. Specially in tournaments with consecutive rounds, not wasting your time in a position you are unlikely to win can definitely make a difference if you can use it to rest or prepare for the next round.
Finally, there are potentially even psychological pros to offering a draw. It's a reach, but for example, if you had a completely lost position, which you then manage to equalize, offering a draw can have a negative psychological impact in your opponent. An opponent that was winning is unlikely to accept the draw anyway, and the draw offer will sometimes make them angry and overpush for a win.
For starters, it's guaranteeing half a point can be more than just for ego and Elo, it can be the difference between winning cash at an event, qualifying for another tournament, or even getting a master norm. Without context on the players' situation, we can't know what is more important.
Second, a good use for offering a draw (that I have used in the past) is to save time and energy that could be more helpful in the next round. Specially in tournaments with consecutive rounds, not wasting your time in a position you are unlikely to win can definitely make a difference if you can use it to rest or prepare for the next round.
Finally, there are potentially even psychological pros to offering a draw. It's a reach, but for example, if you had a completely lost position, which you then manage to equalize, offering a draw can have a negative psychological impact in your opponent. An opponent that was winning is unlikely to accept the draw anyway, and the draw offer will sometimes make them angry and overpush for a win.
Exactly @vizmai - this happened to me in one of my recent games. I was slightly worse in the endgame, I offered a draw. My opponent declined, I expected that (of course he tried to win his slightly better position). I wasn't too worried and I defended patiently. He made an over-aggressive king move in the resulting N-endgame (instead of going for a drawish line), which gave me the chance to activate my queenside-majority (and win the game).
My best advice is not to secondguess yourself and don't fix your mindset to either being too disposed towards or prone against draws. But I grant the author's point, that you should be careful not to offer a draw simply out of fear of playing on, and also should not necessarily accept a draw to avoid defeat if your position is completely lost, if the opponent simply pities you. But I think you, the player, is the best one suited to decide for yourself what you want to do over the board. In some cases, for instance if you are playing a team match, you should ask the team leader if it's okay to offer or accept a draw - in the case that the result is not completely obvious; since you're not just playing for yourself but for the team also.
Next time I'm losing against Magnus Carlsen and he has forced mate, if he offers a draw I'm not gonna accept, no matter how much rating I get, that was very insightful