Purposefully dragging a game out in a drawn position

Hi all-

I'm playing a game https://www.chess.com/daily/game/229864454 that has reached a drawn position.  It's the Philidor rook and pawn endgame, one of the most well-known positions in all of chess: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philidor_position

I've offered my opponent a draw 3 times, each after making a move...only to be refused each time.  In order to demonstrate that I knew how to defend this drawn position, I sent the above link.   A bit later, I received this message:

"First off buddy, you don't need to send me some crappy link about Philidor, I am sure you know that many weak players have lost such a drawn ending.

Secondly, if you knew anything about chess etiquette, you'd know that its ONLY the right of the player with the material advantage to offer a draw in drawn positions (do you really think I can't get a draw whenever I want?).

Secondly, you would know that after offering a draw you shouldn't then offer another one? Of course you don't.

All you have now done by sending me that link is ensure that I will drag this game out for as long as humanly possible."

I can easily ignore the arrogance and vindictiveness, but these two statements do cause me concern:

1.) He's says that "I have no right to make a draw offer" and that it's "ONLY the right of the player with the material advantage to offer a draw in drawn positions"
Is this true?

2.) He now intends to "drag this game out for as long as humanly possible"...
Isn't stalling/quitting a game bad manners?
I suspect it's probably against any existing friendly/good-play etiquette or policy...

Is there anything I can do ?

The FIDE rules state that a draw offer can be made at any time, although etiquette dictates that it should be made after your move.  

Only the player with a material advantage can offer a draw? LOL that's nonsense..and quite surprising given the fact that he's asking 50£ for chess lessons!

PS - don't give in to his rudeness.  Taking a loss in a clearly drawn position is wrong.

He's employing the Dead Man's Defense. In this case attack. He's hoping you'll time out because you died. It's a thing in correspondence chess. It's the last refuge of scoundrels.

Repeated draw offers do get annoying - I wouldn’t exactly say the drawn has been ‘proved’ yet. 

And yeah, normally the person with the notional advantage would extend the draw offer after exhausting their winning attempts.

Either player can offer a draw at any time.  However, once your opponent declines the draw, you should just drop the issue and play the game to completion.  It's been my experience that higher-rated players refuse draw offers from lower rated players (one even told me that only the higher rated player is allowed to offer a draw).  Dragging the game out because you've bruised his ego is ill-mannered, but such is life.

Please keep us enlightened. tyvm

Many players consider it a breach of etiquette for the lower rated player to offer a draw, or for the player defending--even in a textbook drawn position--to offer a draw. This belief is not universal, but it is quite common.

In My 60 Memorable Games, Bobby Fischer mentions his own breach of etiquette with such a draw offer (against Tal, if I recall correctly--the book is on the shelf in another room), although he does not elaborate on why it was a breach of etiquette.

Ziryab

I think that this might be one of those "gentlemen's agreement" type things.  The player that I mentioned in my earlier post did say that at his club only the higher rated player was allowed to offer a draw.  As I remember the game, two or three moves later, he offered a draw.

I don't have any experience with this so-called 'chess etiquette'...and have never read or a seen a text describing these 'unwritten' rules.  The link  I sent was innocent...simply trying to inform him that I knew how to defend, and agreeing to a draw would enable us to spend our time on other games.  I had no idea that some high rated players were so 'thin-skinned'.

IMO it's one thing to extend a game because you believe you have winning chances, but quite another to do it out of spite...

Until now, I've always found chess.com a fun and friendly place to play.

Your behavior was reasonable. His notion of etiquette seems a little skewed to me, but he is not completely wrong.

After the first draw refusal, however, it is his place to make the next offer, not yours.

Yes, he should offer a draw.

Simply telling "hey, I know how to defend Philidor" would be way more appropiate that sending that link, looks a bit condescending IMHO.

But anyway, these matters always look like a storm on a teacup to me. People who keep playing when they are losing: if they lose, you get the point; if not, their attitude was proven correct. People who keep playing when it is a draw: again, if it is a draw, you get the half point; if they lose, nuff said; if they win, their attitude was proven correct. 

So, nothing to complain about.

We've probably spent more time discussing this than it would take to complete the game (actual time considering and making the move, not the total elapsed time between moves - that could be days if one player uses the full time control).

There are exceptions to the Philidor draw involving positioning of pieces.  I have seen many misplay this drawn ending in tournaments, because they did not understand tne draw as well as they thought.  Chess is a practical game as much a game of theory.

I've never taken a draw. The only draws I've had were 3 fold repetition. I've been offered draws 5 times, and won all 5 games. If it's a draw get to the position where it's a repetitive move order. Then get it....

I think practicality slightly outweighs theory