I played an online 5/0 blitz tournament recently on a well-known
server; in one game, we came down to an ending with a rook and two
pawns on each side and no real distinguishing features except---- I
had a minute and a half left on my clock and the other guy had 9
seconds. He started repeatedly offering a draw. I did not accept and
ran him out of time and won.

He sent me a very angry message saying that the position was a dead
draw (true enough) and that I was REQUIRED to accept a draw. He was
to say the least unsportsmanlike in his language.

My contention is that clock management is part of blitz and that my
win was legitimate.

Is there any sort of written or unwritten rule about this?

Thanks for any insights from more experienced players.

On 17 Apr 2007 07:13:45 -0700, "
wrote:

I played an online 5/0 blitz tournament recently on a well-known
server; in one game, we came down to an ending with a rook and two
pawns on each side and no real distinguishing features except---- I
had a minute and a half left on my clock and the other guy had 9
seconds. He started repeatedly offering a draw. I did not accept and
ran him out of time and won.

He sent me a very angry message saying that the position was a dead
draw (true enough) and that I was REQUIRED to accept a draw. He was
to say the least unsportsmanlike in his language.

My contention is that clock management is part of blitz and that my
win was legitimate.

Is there any sort of written or unwritten rule about this?

Thanks for any insights from more experienced players.

While it might have been a gallant gesture to offer him a draw if the
position were dead drawn, it was NOT unsportsmanlike to blitz him out
when he had only 9 seconds, IMO. Might have been a different story
if, say, you had two minutes and he had a minute and a half. At any
rate, offering the draw repeatedly IS unsportsmanlike and is against
the ususal rules for play.

On Apr 17, 4:13 pm, " wrote:

My contention is that clock management is part of blitz and that my
win was legitimate.

Right.

Is there any sort of written or unwritten rule about this?

Well, he at least has broken an existing and written law, which
forbids one to offer draw over and over again. Besides that, he has no
right to complain about unsportsmanlike behaviour. If he has left just
9 seconds against your 90 seconds means he clearly hasn't spent his
time as good as you did. In Blitz that's his problem, not yours.

Greetings,
Ralf

In article .com,
" wrote:

I played an online 5/0 blitz tournament recently on a well-known
server; in one game, we came down to an ending with a rook and two
pawns on each side and no real distinguishing features except---- I
had a minute and a half left on my clock and the other guy had 9
seconds. He started repeatedly offering a draw. I did not accept and
ran him out of time and won.

You were well within your rights to play on.

It's one thing to play out an obvious, technical draw - say, your
opponent has a philidor position, and you're swinging the rook around
making checks when you have no way to make progress.

It's another thing entirely if there's enough material and play left in
the position - regardless of the theoretical outcome - that one player
has to defend with some skill in order to hold the draw.

Of course, the dividing line between these two situations is not so
cut-and-dried, but it seems to me that rook endings with lots of pawns
almost always have the potential for plenty of play.

You did nothing wrong.

-Ron

wrote in message
oups.com...
I played an online 5/0 blitz tournament recently on a well-known
server; in one game, we came down to an ending with a rook and two
pawns on each side and no real distinguishing features except---- I
had a minute and a half left on my clock and the other guy had 9
seconds. He started repeatedly offering a draw. I did not accept and
ran him out of time and won.

He sent me a very angry message saying that the position was a dead
draw (true enough) and that I was REQUIRED to accept a draw. He was
to say the least unsportsmanlike in his language.

My contention is that clock management is part of blitz and that my
win was legitimate.

Is there any sort of written or unwritten rule about this?

Thanks for any insights from more experienced players.


He was the one who broke the rules of chess. Repeated draw offers is
harassment and against the rules of chess.
You did the right thing. You also get used to bad language on the web :-)

Regards

There is a book about Blitz which contains rules - Blitz Theory by Jonathan
Maxwell, which has a forward by Walter Browne, the second edition is 2005,
first 1999, and is ISBN 0967775205. I can't remember if I reviewed it for
Chessville.


wrote in message
oups.com...
I played an online 5/0 blitz tournament recently on a well-known
server; in one game, we came down to an ending with a rook and two
pawns on each side and no real distinguishing features except---- I
had a minute and a half left on my clock and the other guy had 9
seconds. He started repeatedly offering a draw. I did not accept and
ran him out of time and won.

He sent me a very angry message saying that the position was a dead
draw (true enough) and that I was REQUIRED to accept a draw. He was
to say the least unsportsmanlike in his language.

So! the very idea of blitz is to play a game taking 5 minutes - and time
management is paramount - that's the point of playing fast. Of course you
won this game fair and square! 1-0, no problems.

My contention is that clock management is part of blitz and that my
win was legitimate.

Is there any sort of written or unwritten rule about this?

Thanks for any insights from more experienced players.

See above.

I offer one more thing, which supercedes rules, and is no requirement at
all - but is a classy thing to do, if you can, and most of us would not do
it.

I know that in Lindsborg Kansas when Susan Polgar played World Champion
Anatoly Polgar, she had such a time advantage in one game on the clock, in a
position that was far from decided, that she offered a draw when she would
certainly would have won by simply playing more moves.

This is such a classy thing to do, that it supercedes any rules, just like
the spirit of the game is superior to whatever the current rules are. I
don't know about you, but offering a draw to a World Champion when you could
win is maybe not for us mortals, eh? But doing so seems more than merely
winning a game of chess.

Don't take this as a criticism - what would I do if I could win a game
against Karpov? I don't know. )) How hard it would be not to claim a fair
and square win!

I did once gave a draw to an IM in a simul who was lost because I felt sorry
for him, since he had been circling under the sun for 3 hours already, and
he was a good sport.

You are within your rights to absolutely claim your win, and if you want to
can claim more than a win, its a choice to join the Gods, such as in the
Polgar/Karpov example

Cordially, Phil Innes

just like
the spirit of the game is superior to whatever the current rules are.

This is a very meaningful observation: there is indeed the spirit of
the game, and I think in a drawn position with clocks roughly equal,
say a minute or so each to go in a blitz game, a draw would be "the
right thing." Surely a legitimate cause of complaint, in terms of
sportsmanship, would be in such a situation to merely turn the contest
into who can click the mouse (or punch the clock) faster, over a
series of dozens of moves.

I am convinced now that in my case, which was a tournament game, my
claim to a win is easily justified by my markedly better time
management. Thanks to everyone who responded and clarified more than
just the letter of the law.

wrote:
just like
the spirit of the game is superior to whatever the current rules are.

This is a very meaningful observation: there is indeed the spirit of
the game, and I think in a drawn position with clocks roughly equal,
say a minute or so each to go in a blitz game, a draw would be "the
right thing." Surely a legitimate cause of complaint, in terms of
sportsmanship, would be in such a situation to merely turn the contest
into who can click the mouse (or punch the clock) faster, over a
series of dozens of moves.

You mean...like BLITZ?


I am convinced now that in my case, which was a tournament game, my
claim to a win is easily justified by my markedly better time
management. Thanks to everyone who responded and clarified more than
just the letter of the law.



--
Kenneth Sloan
Computer and Information Sciences +1-205-932-2213
University of Alabama at Birmingham FAX +1-205-934-5473
Birmingham, AL 35294-1170 http://www.cis.uab.edu/sloan/