Draw Ethics / Strategy

In a situation a while ago, I was facing a very solid checkmate against me, any wrong move and my opponent would mate me, or at least that was my view, there may have been some elegant way out that I didn't see. I chose the perpetual check, using my Q until we drew? 

Ethical?  Just curious what the group thinks.

You don't owe it to someone, to let them win, if they can't stop you from drawing...

I agree with nameno1had, in the face of certain death, perpetual check, stalemate or any other means of drawing is not only ethical, it is brilliant.  I drew a game a while back I was so over whelmingly winning, I was really not paying a whole lot of attention as boxed my opponents king in - just wondering why he had not resigned yet.  He had a rook with plenty of room to move so I really did not look at stalemate that closely even though all his pawns were stuck.

He came up with a brilliant suicide move with his rook where I had to take it or die, but since his king was boxed in and his pawns were stuck, if I took it, it was a stalemate.

I really admired his persistance in fighting to the end and bore him no ill will for catching me getting lazy.

In my games, I generally keep trying until all hope is lost.  Although, I sometimes find that my move quality declines when there is little hope left.  Still, I think there is a lot to be learned by fighting to the bitter end even if the only hope is a slippery draw.

However, I do think that playing for a draw feels wrong to many.  It feels that way to me sometimes which is why I opened this forum.  I had one opponent who had an advantage on me and I was in the process of forcing into a three times repetition, offer to let me out of the pickle I was in by moving a piece to a certain square if I promised not to take him.  I took the draw and he would not play me in a rematch.  I guess he thought it was wrong of me to do that.

Thanks - now that I think of it - I had a situation Sorg67 described.  I had someone "well and truly beat" and he got me to take a piece that forced a stalemate.  I personally congratulated him as I thought it was a cool move, I did not see the stalemate at all until it was done.

I had two really good games end in draws recently.  Both against higher rated players.  In the first, I was lost, considered resigning - rook and pawn v rook, knight and pawn and he was in position to win my pawn.  I thought I would lose the pawn and he would be able to use his knight to push his pawn and win.  But I made life difficult for him and he lost his pawn when he took mine.  He spent 35 moves chasing me around before he gave up.  In the other, I was winning.  Rook, knight and 3 pawns v Rook and knight, but he kept fighting and I could not push my pawn advantage.  I should have won the second one, but in both I learned to always keep fighting even when it seem hopeless.

Sometimes, seeking a draw can be a challenging task. In the game that follows, though facing an apparently weaker opponent, for reasons irrelevant, White had to play for a draw - at any cost and as fast as possible.

Strange as it may seem, this Sicilian Kan miniature is an interesting exercise. Note White's unorthodox continuation at move 11, employed specifically towards this end. For the record, if playing for a win, White should have continued with 11. Nxc6...       

Two draws in a row and three draws in the last 10 games all against higher rated opponents.  Guess I am getting the hang of this draw thing.  Although one of them should have been a win.  In fact they were all different.  One I was losing, one I was winning and one was even.  The even one was a good one for me since in the past I might have pushed unwisely for the win and lost as a result.  in this case I judged that any possibly winning attack would be losing if defended well.

you are stronger if you can keep a draw against higher rated player