Nitpicky grammatical issue

So why is it won (past tense) and lost (past tense), but draw (present tense)?

The past tense for draw is drew,but draw is more obvious.

Sorry for the immediate off-topic, but for me the practice of awarding half a point to each player after a draw is useless. The goal of the game is to checkmate your opponent's king, and its consequence in tournament play is a magic point for you! If you're having a bad day or you've never been 100% healthy when beaten, that magic point goes to your opponent.

But when the game is a draw, the magic point magically splits itself in half and bam here's one for you here's another for you xoxo and hasta la vista. No! Dammit! Why?! There is no need to even think about a point when the game is drawn. There's no point. Nobody won. It's castling baby, 0-0, zero to zero.

Pardon the pointy post in an otherwise soon-to-be-grammatically tense thread.

I disagree, as a system that gives 0 points for a draw fails to differentiate between a draw and a loss. A loss can be achieved with no effort or skill whatsoever, but that is not the case for a draw against an opponent who is playing for a result. So it's reasonable to rate a draw as somewhere between a win and a loss.

Also, from a practical standpoint, if I get 0 points for a draw, wouldn't I just resign in a dead drawn position, thereby giving my opponent an unearned win? After all, getting the draw gives me no additional benefit, but forces me to use more of my time.

Or why 2 adjectives - won and lost (a won game; a lost game) and 1 noun - adj. would be drawn as in drawn game?

bb_gum234's win/loss/draw seems most proper to me.

In some matches and certain tournaments, at times, it has been specified that draws don't count as games palyed.  In certain other tournaments draws have been counted as ¼ point instead of ½ point. So the issue of draws has been debated historically.

chess should have footbal style scoring.

win 3 points,

draw 1 point each,

loss 0 points.

If you're going to nitpick grammer, at least get it right. Win, lose, draw; or: won, lost, drawn.

bb_gum234 schreef:

I noticed that a while ago, but forgot about it.

Won, Lost, and Drawn or

Win, Loss, Draw

It's only a matter of time before they start talking about who Carlsen is versing for the next World Championship...

I did realize that "won" and "lost" could be either adjectives/ past participle verbs or past-tense verbs, but didn't give much thought to it at first. Now that I think about it, the former is definitely more likely. However, I think the most appropriate form is probably "win," "loss," and "draw" (as nouns), since these refer to the game itself rather than just describing it.

Not that I'm terribly bothered by the current discrepancy, of course, or else I wouldn't have characterized the issue as nitpicking.

I used to be interested in drawers in my younger days.

I agree. Won and lost are both past participles, meaning that they can be used as past tense verbs or adjectives. In this case, drawn should be used, since it's another past participle. Still, I think win, loss, and draw are much better. I would consider it the best form.

Don't hurt loser's feelings by giving '0' rather support their ego by

win = 5

draw = 3

loss = 1

1 point for being a good sport and participating!

The horror:

Caedrel wrote:

It's only a matter of time before they start talking about who Carlsen is versing for the next World Championship...

So, who do you think is Carlsen versing for the next world championship?

Win/lose/draw

Won/lost/drawn

Win/loss/draw

I prefer the baseball adages:

Sometimes you win

Sometimes you lose

Sometimes it rains

Regards,

Lou

I'm gonna go out on a limb and predict Carlsen vs Anand 3.0. Since the last WCC Anand has clearly been the second best player in the world IMO - no one else has been as consistently good as him.

So, which one will produce the poetry?

*versing*

I'd say the result will probably be similar to the previous 2 championships.

indeed