Will Carlsen accept early draw offers from Anand?

We did NOT see a draw offer. We saw a draw claim. That's a critical difference. The rules for the Candidates contained the anti-draw rule, it wouldn't surprise me if there was such a rule here, but I haven't been bothered to look.

Today's draw was a repetition of position, which is distinct from a draw offer. Repetition is clearly specified in 3.7.1.b (3) of the link.

17.Qb3 is Carlsen's only move that is not clearly worse. Presumably, he would have followed the procedure outlined in 3.7.1.b (3) by stopping the clocks, consulting the Arbiter's scoresheet, and writing Qb3 on his scoresheet to claim the draw. At this point, had the Arbiter determined that Qb3 did not lead to a triple occurrance of position, Carlsen's move would have been played on the board and Anand would have gained three minutes on the clock.

I have not watched the video of the end of the game, so I'm uncertain that my scenario is precisely correct. It may be that the players agreed to a draw with no objection from the Arbiter.

Yes. My mistake. The bit about the Arbiter's scoresheet is obvious nonsense in a standard game, but applicable in rapid and blitz tie-breaks. 

I welcome documentation supporting the claim that draw offers are forbidden in this match prior to move 30. There was a bit of discussion on this point earlier in this thread, but I cannot find evidence that it is so.

Such a rule, it seems to me, would significantly alter the usual conditions for WCC matches.

Today's draw appears to have been a draw by repetition.

3.8.3

The players cannot draw a game by agreement before black’s 30th move. In the cases of perpetual check or threefold repetition before black’s 30th move, a claim for a draw is permitted only through the Chief Arbiter (or his Deputy).

Thanks. It is there.

Replay the game. 17. Qb3 is a three-fold repetition.

I said that.

However, the game score that I downloaded ends with Black's move 16. The difference raises an interesting question. Does the official game score end with what is played on the board, what appears on the scoresheet of the player who claimed a draw, or what appears on the opponent's scoresheet? Is it necessary that all three agree?

That's probably exactly what happened. Carlsen wrote his intended move and called the arbiter. But the "official" move list comes from the moves recorded by electronic sensors on the board, especially so soon after the game. And as per the rules, Carlsen never actually played his intended move.

I misread your original post. By having your dog as your avatar, your opinions always look more stupid than they are :)

lol 

Boxers are smart dogs!

the gray text!

Ziryab:

Never mind someone else posted it.

(It's funny about just how many people are outraged by the draw result! I shudder ta think what they would say if Anand actually won. Heh.)

I said that it was a draw by repetition.

Ziryab wrote:

I also asked about claims made on page one of this thread concerning draw offers before move 30. That question was answered.

Hopefully Vishy goes for the throat with the white pieces and we don't have to have a draw discussion again tomorrow.  

If Someone Offered You 3:1 Odds, in Favor of Carlsen, Who Would You Take?

• My money would be on Magnus. (33%)
   
• The smart money would be on Vishy. (27%)
   
• Those odds are about right, so I'm not sure. (7%)
   
• I'm a chess player, I don't have any money. (33%)
   

Thank you! 1644 votes cast

Will Carlsen accept early draw offers from Anand?

Yes he will.

I think the players are trying to beat the Anand-Gelfand match in terms of shortest draws.

Dissapointing the short draws, but i think the match format is to blame.

Yep

OK in the first game anand played strong in the opening and forced Magnus to take a draw by repetition, This is a good result for black!

In the second game Magnus used the Caro-kann with success and Anand took a draw by repetition to avoid a long ending.

The players also have to save energy

In game 3 I expect a long game where carlsen will put presure on Anand.