Remove the draw offer !

Play Armageddon and sudden death until 1 winner. Remove Draw!

The problem is, how do you know that it's pre-arranged? And for me, even if it is, it's called strategy, and the players shouldn't be fined.

Chess (and any sport for that matter) isn't about the spectators. It's about obtaining the best result, whether that is a win or draw. If the spectators think that a particular player/ team is boring, then just don't watch it, and switch to a different player/ team. I'm so tired of all the soccer fans complaining when their team wins every game 1-0. As long as the team I'm supporting wins (or draws when a draw is favorable to them), I don't care how they do it. Maybe those fans that are conplaining should switch to another team that kept winning 3-0 or 4-1 until it met their team and lost?

I don't see any particular reason that not allowing draws before move 15 would alter the game much...

Another idea I have heard:

Offering a draw becomes a move...want to offer one?  Give up a tempo.  This would mean you would need to disallow draw offers when in check, though (which seems fine).

The key is that offering draws currently has zero downside at all.  I'm surprised we have never read stories about players offering a draw to much higher rated opponents every single move just to annoy them and disrupt the game.  Or heck, why stop at once per move?

"I would like to offer a draw here, what do you think?"

(ten seconds after being declined)

"After careful consideration, I would like to again offer a draw in this position...oh, sorry, were you thinking?" 

You'd get reported if you did it every move.

How about to attract more attention to the game, we cut in half the number of pieces on the board and the board itself therefore reducing the number of moves and lessening the attention span required for all the up and coming fans of the game. We combine this with say a 5 to 10 minute limit and the funniest, most outrageous commentators that we can find. For example, shark tank judges would make a great choice for the american idol show if they only knew a little about music. We need to combine another line of followers with the game or simply well known or respected individuals.Think about reality tv and why it attracts so many viewers. Cops does not have its following because it tries to eduacate people on the laws. Its the unknown action and the unforseen endings that keep the viewer tied down. Just because cheating , bad sportsmanship, and other offenses are illegal does not mean that they could not be used in a funny / audaciuos way to help grow the game. How about we make it a part of the gambling scene which is only going to continue to grow.      

You'd get reported if you did it every move.

Sure, and then you'd stop, but the damage would be done anyway.  

The point is this:  it's silly to have a decision in any game's design that has no possible negative consequences...because that is a clear incentive to abuse.  Any online game designer will tell you that...games that have tens of thousands of players playing at once but only 1-2 "referees" available have to design around anything that invites abuse and requires human intervention/arbitration that way.  You design around that need, and your game will be much smoother.  

Chess isn't a sport. Someone is a wheelchair can play chess. It's almost absurd that people are trying to promote it as though it is a sport and even have taken to subjecting top chess players to drug testing and for steroids. As if any drug could do anything but harm a player. If I knew my opponent did drugs before a tournament I'd slip him an extra hundred buck to make sure he was really loopy during the game and if it was steroids then great because I guess he can get a cute girlfriend from his big muscles instead of just being a chess nerd.

You might find a lot of...

I don't think the draw is the problem. I think the players are.

Take the draw away from Chess. We will still see some draws even if the point system is changed.

Really depends on the drug.  There are certain stimulants thought to act as cognitive enhancers.  Visit any University campus and see for yourself.

And 50 move rule and 2 minute rule

Very early draws at under GM level are pretty lame, IMHO. But when GMs agree upon an early draw, the position is usually dead drawn!

Let's face facts:  if we really wanted to popularize chess in the US, we'd need to involve beer, scantily-clad women, and have two commentators with only a layman's understanding of the game talk about banal things while the game is underway.  Can we get a slow-motion instant replay of that Rook taking the open file?  Can we cut away to a touching 30-second bio of one of the players whose father is terminally ill?

Chess is fine the way it is, let's not Americanize it.  Maybe we should do what Armenia is doing, and teach it to our children.  If you build it, they will come.

a draw is a draw. Accept it. People hate accepting draws. It has happened more than once that someone declined a draw and the walked in checkmate!. Just accept that a draw is a draw. why waste time?

That man speaks the truth. You can't popularise something people don't understand.

Not many sports fans understand sports rules especially controversial ones.

The thing with chess is players tend not to explain clearly to the viewers or the commentators are not good enough to explain it.

So Fischer made controversial moves by declining to play. Suddenly more people wants to know what's went on. It's good for chess.

You see in boxing we have Muhammad Ali, in chess we have Fischer, in tennis we have Mc Enroe. After Muh Ali and Tyson, I rarely see boxing on TV.

The point I want to make is it's not necessary to popularize chess by making people to understand. The thing is people curiosity that make them interested.

Let say baseball. It's a boring game for some. But every season there are fights. So, let chess player fights to make it more interesting. lol.

But not if your sole purpose is to win, by whatever means necessary.

truth

the only true way to stop "boring" draws is to make them undesirable for the player in terms of results. if a draw will secure someone's desired tournament result/prize, obviously he's going to super-insta-snap take it.

"sofia rules" are pretty silly imo. even i know a bunch of openings that lead to a forced repetition, and another bunch that lead to lifeless clearly drawn endings (that could be played out just to say that the game took a lot of moves).
you just can't artificially keep top players from agreeing to a draw if they want to.

Let's make it happen!