Players Refusing To Take Draws

I'm noticing that weaker players tend to just never take a draw, regardless of how practical it is. Just in the last 48 hours I've played several games where we reached move ~25 and the game was literally a computer 0.0 and I offered a draw. They'd refuse. A few moves later while they're thinking long - I'll offer a draw. They'll refuse. 10 moves later I'll checkmate them or force resignation.

Here's another one. Granted, I was down on time but this keeps happening. Over on ICC and against better opponents, it seems that they recognize the value of a point or two rather than losing nine or ten.

Offered this guy a draw twice during the game:

Weaker players are often told to play on to the bitter end for the learning experience.

Maybe they just don't think it is a draw. Maybe the example you posted is not the best. It doesn't look drawish to me. I wonder at exactly what stage you offered the draw. 

I don't agree that weaker players play to the bitter end. My experience is that weaker players give up too easily. I always try to fight to the bitter end even if my chances are poor. I am currently playing an opponent who is rated 2110 in a three-day per move game. I am more than 99% sure I will win. I won't post it here because it is still ongoing. But the point is, he is not resigning and I respect him for that. It is part of the reason that hs is a player rated >2000.

I wasn't talking about correspondence - aka ENGINE - chess. I was talking about real chess. Live chess.

Doesn't seem like a draw to me... 

If people want to cheat by using chess engines they are as likely to use them in correspondence as in 30min live games and in even shorter time controls so no need to diss correspondence chess

+ it's kind of confusing when you talk about ''weaker players'' not wanting to take draw and in your example you are playing against higher rated player than yourself 

I don't think that there was a drawish position in the game above. Black had a nice position, pushed for a win and missed a checkmate.

I generally recommend to my students to never offer draws and never accept them, unless there are bare kings on the board. That's how you learn to play fighting chess, that's how you learn how to look twice for resources when there don't seem to be any at first sight.

It has never happened the opposite?

What part of this game was equal?  Your opponent had a past pawn or was a pawn up from move 15 until he blundered  on 33.  Even if the engine returns an = who accepts draws with a passed pawn or when a pawn up?

Your opponent in the posted game lost because he got greedy and went pawn hunting when you still had counter play.  I would of happily played black's position all day from move 30. 

If you have counter play why offer a draw?

If this was an opposite colour bishop ending you would have a point.  With all the heavies still on the board, not so much.

If your opponents won't accept draws in drawn or weaker positions why keep offering draws?  That is irritating. 

I would say that less than 10% of my draws are mutually agreed and then they are 100% guaranteed dead draws, i.e. Opposite Bish or dead equal rook endings.   I tend to notice I only get draw offers when I am clearly winning.

If you want a draw so bad force a three-fold or 50 move and you will have your draw.

“If your opponent offers you a draw, try to work out why he thinks he’s worse off” - Nigel Short

I like when my opponents don't resign or draw.

It gives me a chance to demonstrate perfect techinque.

After the game is over they go to an office depot and have the PGN printed on a canvas.

They than come home and hang it up on the wall as a picture frame.

They stare at it and say that is what true art looks like.

I am not a chess player you know!

I am an artist.

The pencil I use to write my PGN is my paint brush.

The position repeats itself around move 16/17. That was when I first offered a draw. Of course, hindsight is 20/20 but I'm sure my opponent would have rather taken the draw there than have dealt with what became the eventual outcome.

Again though, in his defense - I was significantly down on time compared to him the entire game.

Yes, but repeating positions once or even twice is a common technique, even recommended by the Russian Chess School. To gain time on the clock, clarity and for its psychological effect on the opponent, who might get hopeful for a moment. It can also win time by making the opponent think about whether he wants a draw or not.

In the above position on move 16/17, no matter what chess software says black seems clearly preferable to me. It's almost an ideal French-type. Pressure on e5, an active rook on the f-file, enough control of square d4 to avoid a blockading situation in near future. The Bc8 is a problem piece, but may be activated via e8-g6 later when g6-g5 is played. Going for d5-d4, as in the game, is also possible, but then white's positions may have some merits too after Nc3-e4 (which unless I miss a tactic is better than your 19.Ne2).

opponent is a fighter isnt they gotta respect that and then take em down on the board ,

I was playing a guy once in a bishop's of opposite color ending where we both had a passed pawn--only problem, our queening square was the color of our opponent's bishops...I offered him a draw but he either did not see it or declined it. I ended up winning on time. (WOOHOO!!!--but really, take the draw next time...)

Draws are for point mongering when you are trying to win cash and prestige. Are economizing your chess.com ratings worth losing practice to you? Someone will crack it's not like both players have flawless endgame technique. Accept the draw when you're convinced, not when you'd rather escape the game and hope your opponent feels the same.