Yes
Then I applaud you for your courage. I don’t think most TDs would bother, partly because of all the grief it would cause, and partly because of the futility of it – the players could just pre-arrange a 45-move draw, and maybe even make it look real.
Bill Smythe
FIDE had a 12 move rule back in the early 1960’s for draws. If anyone looks at the last few match games with Botvinnik, the games ended in 12 moves. Did anyone say Botvinnik pre-arranged the games during the World Championship matchs?
thats not the point. if players pre-arrange a draw thats simply wrong period. if players agree to draw after a few moves with most pieces still on board it is just bad for chess (terrible for promoting it, making it appealing to others, boring for spectators especially in championship matches, and just plain takes the COMPETITION out of 2 players competing). when i started this thread, my point was that agreed draws are just terrible for chess and that i didnt understand why they are even allowed. players will continue to have these draws because they can, they are legal. no one is questioning that. agreed draws are ok in k+r vs k+r, and other such situations. grandmasters are no exception. im sure those Botvinik games youre referring to were terribly disapointing, as were all those early draws in linares this year. terrible for the sport of chess (is it considered a sport/game, whatever). as someone else pointed out, if 2 players really want to draw they can clear the whole board until only kings remain. yes, theres always a way around rules, but i’d be willing to be that most players are ethical and wouldnt break a “no agreed draws” rule purposely.
Draws are boring when its only a few moves. If FIDE gave up in the 1960’s with short draws, how can the USCF force the issue? Most players do not care to see long games between players below their own rating. I can understand seeing stronger players them myself play out a game then a draw. On the other hand can see how bored stronger players would not care how the game ended with weaker players then themselves. If during the last round with only two active boards, I will be going to watch the board on board 1 then on board 70.
You really can’t prove a “pre-arranged” draw. But you take risks when you agree to a draw before hand. I did that at our past state championship with a friend and ended up getting 2nd place.
But if you agree / disagree about the morality, you can’t really stop players from it.
The only way a director can know of a pre-arranged draw, is evidence before the start of the round or the event.
I disagree. If most players followed this “rule”, you never would have noticed (or complained about) premature draws to begin with.
Bill Smythe
Its’ unethical to pre-arrange a draw. The directors, any organized society with chess have been dealing with the problems of draws for centuries. The last major Grand Master with the drive against draws was Bobby Fischer. FIDE or the USCF will not go to any match or tournament were draws do not count. The only way to make sure pre-arrange draws will not happen is never counting any draws.
So if I take a draw on move 1 in the last round to win a prize, that’s unethical?
Maybe I just want to get home to my nagging wife and take some money with me so I don’t have to hear about it all day Sunday.
I don’t think so.
If you do that in my tournament, your not going to get the prize money. I’ll double forfeit both players, forfeit all your games, then fine you for the cost of the entry fee if you want to register again.
From personal experience it can be very complicated. As one of two 3-0s with a single 2½-½ behind, I was offered a draw on move 3. I was Black and the lower-rated player. I couldn’t justify playing for a win in a position where I wasn’t even yet equal, so I took the draw. I would have never considered offering the draw in his situation, but I would also find it strange for the TD to punish me.
Again, the best solution here is the plus-score format. If two players at 3-0 draw in the last round, they are punishing only themselves. Nobody else’s prize is reduced, and the organizer gets to pocket what would have been part of the prize fund.
Bill Smythe
Yes, Dave, it would be considered unethical, as Douglas rightly (this time) points out:
I would also reject your claim, and then take you to your home and, using your own chips, cards and the table you provide, and with Kelly looking on, paddle you severely in NLHE, explaining to her along the way, why you are being punished so! I’m a tough TD! 
Terry Winchester
Ha ha ha. I’d like to see that happen.
I still disagree with almost everyone’s arguments.
If it’s so “unethical”, why are they forcing people to agree to not have a draw within the first 20 moves in Minnesota? You’d have to force everyone to sign some paperwork.
Unethical, yes, but I still don’t see anyone posting anything saying players can’t agree to a draw on move 1. Before the tournament, probably according to the rules, but what is “Contest”, is that a tournament or game?
You could rule either way, but taking away a prize fund sound much more serious.
The real un-ethical draws happen when there is no prize money for both players. If a player is at or close to their rating floor, they have nothing too lose if they take a draw. If someone was at one time over 2000, the rating floor is 1800. If the player is now at their rating floor of 1800, the player will not lose one point for a draw. If the other player at 1590, the draw should make the player pass the 1600 mark.
With both players being only 210 points from each others ratings, having a draw would not be a red flag. With the 1800 player at the rating floor, any director would feel the 1800 player is over rated. If it was a pre-arrange draw, the 1590 player should break the 1600 mark granting the player a rating floor of 1400.
Even with the idea of having a 20 move or a 30 moves before the players can ask for a draw. The players can both play very passive with each other for 40 or 100 moves. There is nothing in the rule book making players capture each others peices. If the players want they could lock up the pawns and have a technical draw with the 50 move rule. If two players want a draw (pre-arrange), just play the game out and play for a draw. If I play a game for both sides (white and black), can play the game out to end in a technical draw every single game.
If two players want a pre-arrange draw, they can play passive with each other and then end up with less then 5 minutes on their clock. If its for the prize money to split, the prize money not going to be granted most times till the last game of the last round is finnished. If its’ a pre-arrange draw, then it becomes the last active board to finnish – what director is going to say ‘start over’.
Of course, you’re way off base (again).
If players are 4-0 and they agree to take a draw last round, the “floored” player wouldn’t be floored after winning the 4 first games.
Can’t you sum something up into a few sentences instead of explaining it in 4 paragraphs of useless information? You don’t need to explain it to anyone here, we’ve played before.
Precisely because, I would assume, that it is unetical
Dave, it’s already posted in the rulebook. You can’t really expect us to repost everything in the rulebook, can you?
There really shouldn’t be any debate about this. The rules are clear.
now this should be one hell of an exciting tournament. no draws allowed super-tournament. check this out: