I do not know anything about etiquette but if you want to continue playing he must play (or resign). I think the draw offer is mend for the situation in which you are even and there is no use of playing anymore for both. If you want to play there is no draw.
Etiquette
Sort:
Just to add to my post, he never offeres any draw, but continued to mive his peices, and then later called me a rude player.
He is full of it. Material is even at the beginning, should I offer a draw then?
You have a won game, imho ettiquette would be for him to resign.
I think if u think you can still beat a player then play on...offering draws and resigning etc, are surely based on what you think you can achieve from the game, not any etiquette or personal belief of your oponent.
In this situation it's clear white is in trouble. A draw would be unlogical.
Mostly I would try a few moves see if I can trick the opponent, but when he's making he right moves i'd offer a draw.
I don't know how long it took to get to this position. But offering a draw is your own choice. After some moves it'd be a nice thing to do though
It's etiquette to offer a draw only if it is obvious that the game will go no where, which is not the case in this game. The opposing play just seems to not want to lose. As to why he himself didn't offer a draw...no idea.
I played it out and making the right moves, I would have won, under the 50 moves that he would get a draw. So I don't know what his problem is but he lost that game.
Mar 5, 2008
0
#10
was that game on chess.com ??? what was the position six moves before the diagram??
no it was in real life in person, I dont recall the moves before. I didnt record the game.
This is a game where if you know you're losing, learn from it so you don't make this mistake again. Bad etiquette is offering a draw. We all play to win.
I suggest yo uask him to show you this non-existing rule of ettiquette. He cannot porve that it is a rule anywhere, as chess ettiquette exists for proffessional, tournament and expert play, but not at the high school level in a chess club where the goal is to build and refine your skills or to have fun. It may not be fun to lose, but why bother playing if there is no opportunity for loss?
In this case, your opponent is whining, has not made the offer of a draw himself (which you are FULLY allowed to turn down), and should probably put more effort into the study of his middle game than into his ettiquette.
I agree with you, what is chess without a little risk? And your right, at the high school level, it's not about winning or losing, unless you play preffesionaly in rated competition.
A draw should be offered if you feel you have an even position with the other player or that progress cannot be made from the position,. I have a feeling that the other player was simply annoyed that he lost when he should have offered a draw earlier in the game.
you will win the rook
(I was his opponent, by the way, and I knew I lost by this time.)
Obviously, in this position, since this is black's move, white (in this case, me) has clearly lost the game. But this is due to the fact that I made the terrible blunder leading up to this point. Earlier in the game, when the pieces were in a more even position, it would've been anyone's game, but since, admittedly, I had forgotten the Rook-King mating pattern during this match, I played the next moves out incorrectly, allowing my king to be forced into a rook-pin, and losing the game honestly. Since my friend posted the game in this position rather than an earlier one (since we've both forgotten the moves and moved on by now), it is easy to perceive me as being "whining", or "annoyed", or "full of it", or whatever the people here said about me. If the game went on without me blundering, the game would've been a stalemate regardless, due to the 50-move rule, perpetual check, or repeated positioning. I admit to my mistake in play which, consequently cost me the game. It saddens me that I am now antagonized after the question of ettiquite was asked out of context.
I would like to say, that in a history of many chess games, there have been many players who know that the game is very even, and if both players play correctly, there is no clear end in sight. In this event, one player offers a draw that the opponent refuses, and the game typically ends when one player accidentally makes a bad move out of exasperation or the like. This, I feel, takes some fun out of the game, since the loser made a mistake that he or she otherwise would not have made during normal play, and would walk away feeling that he or she did not play to the best of his or her ability.
My point at the time of the game was that it is impolite to force a player to play on in a game which is clearly even in material and position (NOT the one he posted above) and would only end in a stalemate regardless unless one of the players makes a mistake.
So tell me, is there a clear victor in a position such as this?
just another crier, (sore loser) forget it.
I never made you play on, i didnt accept a draw, You could have resigned.
Here is an end game I recenty played
Now he challenges me and says that the correct etiquette would be to offer a draw, and that playing it out and winning is rude. I think he was just upset because he lost the game and continues to tell me that it is in the etiquette rules. Tell me your opinion on the situation. The rule he stated was "When material is even, it is proper etiquette to offer a draw".