I just recently received this from the ACP and it is also published on many other sites including ChessBase:
ACP survey on draw offers
The survey about draw offers was started on the 10th of January 2007. We would like to thank everybody who has already taken part in it. As the issue is very important, the deadline for sending back the completed survey has been extended to the 5th of March 2007.
In recent years our game experienced quite a few innovations such as:
change of the classical time control
new system for the World Championship Cycle
anti-doping control
anti-electronic devices control
One more very important issue has been raised recently after the high level tournaments in Corsica and in Sofia: combatting short draws. Short draws cause frequent complaints from the organizers and disappointment for the public.
All this was subject to discussion among the ACP Board recently. We, therefore, decided to make a poll in order to find out your vision of the problem. We would like to thank everybody who has already taken part in it. As the issue is very important, the deadline for sending back the completed survey has been extended to the 5th of March 2007.
ACP Members as well as all chess players having the FIDE title of International Master (IM or WIM) or International Grandmaster (GM or WGM) are kindly invited to take part in this poll. Please express your opinion! The last day to vote is the 5th of March 2007.
GM Bartlomiej Macieja
ACP Secretary
ACP Members can vote online
Non ACP Members having the FIDE title of International Master (IM or WIM) or International Grandmaster (GM or WGM) are kindly requested to send back the completed survey to the ACP Secretary Bartlomiej Macieja at gmbartek@gmail.com
Survey on draw offers
1. A draw offer should be:
a) allowed at any stage of the game (current FIDE rules)
b) allowed after 30 moves of the game are completed
c) allowed after 40 moves of the game are completed
d) allowed after 50 moves of the game are completed
e) not allowed at all (Corsican rule)
f) abstain
2. A draw offer, at the stage where it is allowed, should imply a time penalty in the case it is rejected:
a) yes
b) no
c) abstain
Please give your name, title and correct email address.
I vote for e (Not allowing draw offer at all).
I don’t think any artificial constraints (move limits, &c.) will really work. The best way to deal with short draws is to not invite players known to draw early. When the tournament invitations dry up, so will the GM draws.
Another is the alternate scoring system I’ve seen in which White gets no points for a draw. That will provide an incentive to fight on right there.
(b)
Even in amateur games.
Well, 30 moves is only 15 move-pairs, so I should really say (d).
I find it hard to believe sponsors care. If sponsors cared, sponsors would simply impose the 30 move-pair limit as a condition of sponsorship. But sponsors don’t: why is that?
I am confused: Why has Susan complained that invitees have agreed to short draws, when she as organizer or sponsor had the authority to pre-announce a “Sofia”-like rule?
(Maybe I have those facts wrong?)
I read a GM saying he would be less likely to play in a tournament that imposed the Sofia rule. He would need the tournament to have an above average prize fund to entice him to play.
This survey has a hole in it: what about the 3-repetition rule as a loophole?
GeneM
I partly agree with Anthony that no artificial constraints will really work.
My own proposal is to change the scoring where the tie break is the number of games won rather than the SB score as it is in most events.
A draw is the natural outcome of a perfect game of chess, yet this discussion presupposes that there is something wrong with a draw as opposed to a decisive game. That’s an arbitrary value judgment, but one most of us share. What to use as a tie break formula is also arbitrary, so it would make sense to use the tie break formula to encourage decisive games. Using wins as the tie break says exactly what we mean to say: it is better to score one point in two grame with a win and a loss rather than two draws.
The alternate scoring anthony mention seems like a bad idea. As black I can play extremely solidly and force white to take great risks to win.
Fischer was one of those opposed to short draws. He wanted a 30 move min. imposed. I think draws should not be allowed or players to talk except an arbirter can claim a draw.
Football (soccer) had the same problem 20+ years ago. They applied very simple solution: replaced previous system of 2 points for a win and 1 for a draw with a new one: 3 points for a win and 1 for a draw.
This worked excellently.
No reason it would not work for chess (in case of round robin, and swiss tournaments).