Blitz Chess Etiquette

Although it's not the proper time to offer a draw, if a player offers a draw before moving, is their opponent really not allowed to accept it until after they move? (I know their opponent can wait until they move before deciding to accept it, but do they have to wait?)

No, the players can agree on a draw at any time.

Although there was this kid (teenager) who kept offereing me draws every time it was my move for 4-5 moves in a row, I got up and told the TD, so the TD came over to watch -- the kid must have known it was wrong because he stopped without anyone needing to tell him.

That is a silly comment.  People play for their own reasons.  Your's obviously have to do very little with playing good chess (even in blitz good chess is my goal, although I tend to play riskier) but just winning at all costs.  Your game is just play fast.  I'm sure it explains your playing strength.

This is why I play unrated...I'd just quit the game and not worry about my rating one way or another.

 A draw offer is binding, even when improperly made so you may accept the draw offer without him moving if you so desire or you may demand to see his move first and then accept, or decline, his offer. He cannot retract a draw offer once made.

It is just ridiculous to try and play chess in such a short amount of time, someone is almost sure to run out of time unless either player is bad and receives an early checkmate. To avoid such situations it may be better to play with longer times.

 If you are talking about 1 0 , I agree with you.  I feel differently about classic blitz ( 5 0 ) though, because I have seen some pretty good games in 5 0 and neither player was "bad". I have been on the winning and losing side of some pretty good 5 0 games and many chess players love to play blitz. I have more "fun" when I play blitz and rapid chess than when I play  slow/classic chess.

 An earlier poster described Blitz Chess as a variant, and I think that's the right way to look at it.  I don't think I'm really playing Chess, exactly, when I'm playing Blitz Chess.  I'm playing a Chess-like game, but where control of the clock is an extremely important aspect of play.

I try to still play chess on blitz time controls... but unfortunately on 0 time controls you seldom get to play through the endgame, if the game is not decided by move 30 or so then it becomes a mouse contest to win on time. That is where I find that increments are helpful.

Masters can give 1 min to 5 min time odds to class players and still win because of how much they can immediatly read out of a position.

Blitz chess isn't the same as standard time controls but there's still a lot of chess going on.  Like Reb said he's seen some well played blitz games.

I have won blitz games against masters without time odds (also on 5 0), and I wouldn't accept time odds from anyone anyway.

I wasn't saying that blitz games cannot be well played, in fact quite a few of them are. I am saying that a chess game takes as many moves as it takes, and it doesn't seem natural that the same time should be given to a game that takes 30 moves as to a game that takes 80 moves.

You've won 5 0 games against masters with no odds? -- maybe you didn't know it but they were giving you "just got back from the bar" odds

As for the move thing, the number of moves isn't known till the game ends so I'm not sure what you mean.  It is a different type of chess though, for sure -- and it's true that often the endgame suffers most.

Sorry I didn't make myself clear. (Maybe you had "just got back from the bar" odds when I wrote that post.) The points was about increments, it is usually not possible to predict how many moves a game will have as you point out so it would seem that increments are needed whatever the original time control, but probably more so on fast time controls. Otherwise, I mean, I like blitz myself but I want it to be chess not some other game that superficially resembles it. However fast the game might be, I want it to be decided on the board not on the clock.

I would only accept a draw if the opponent is higher rated than I am, If he is lower I would not lose points over it.

When a game reaches a position such as the one described, the offer of a draw must be seen as falling under one of two categories (or under both, simultaneously): a recognition of incapacity to win on the clock what one was unable to win on the board; or a tactical manouver idealised to control damages. In either case, there is no logical reason - other than mere courtesy - to accept the offer as one should look at these games here as "parallel" to what really happens on actual contests, minus the pressure and the obligation to win.

Is there drawing in Blitz chess? I was playing a game that I pushed for a draw and after 3 reptitve king moves....nothing....seems like it's not part of the logic, and perhaps not the rules of Blitz. Hope someone can answer this.