Professional Players Agreeing Draws Early

Am the only person who is really tired of seeing the best chess players in the world, playing in very prestigious tournaments,  agree to a draw after as little as 16 moves!! That seems so lazy.

I don't want to hear about smart strategy and playing for the points. I want to watch some chess. If a position is a draw, the least you can do it play it out to prove it!

They dont want to waste the other's time, or give the opponent a headache for playing out a position they both know is a draw.

Título en 30 el maestro Luison se Chess com español Facebook se encontró en Google desde M Facebook con twitch

Miguel huaynasi García Chess com es torneo WhatsApp en vivo partidas inmortales YouTube online 2023 torneos

1) I don't see how playing the game you're there to play is a waste of time

2) I would have thought giving your opponent headaches is a good thing

3) "They know it's a draw" assumes perfect play without mistakes. The only way to know that a given position is a draw is to play it out. Drawing the game after 16 moves seems a bit lazy and arrogant to me. It would be like a golfer taking a "gimme" from 10 feet !

IMHO

Magnus Carlsen and Hikaru Nakamura:

1. e4 e5 2. Ke2 Ke7 3. Ke1 Ke8 4. Ke2 Ke7 5. Ke1 Ke8 6. Ke2 Ke7

I suppose you're talking about games like today's Aronian-Niemann matchup, which, yes, fizzled to a draw when they started repeating moves after only half an hour or so. And yes, there were a handful of others that were fairly dull.

But if your takeaway from today's Grand Swiss round is that professional chess is nothing but boring draws, then you can't have been wathing carefully. You could have spent the whole day studying the eighty-two games on offer and not had time to come to terms with more than half the aggressive, fighting, inventive games that were played.

I mean, I'm not sure how to help you with "I want to watch some chess" if this game from this morning doesn't fit the bill.

I mean, if Aronian and Niemann had played an exciting, fighting game, would you have even had time to watch it? You could make time, but only by not watching Esipenko-Keymer, or Caruana-Bacrot, or Vaishali-Milliet, or Sarana-Rapport, or Cheparinov-Duda, or MVL-Pichot, or Ter-Shakiyan-Maghsoodloo, or Murzin-Shirov, or Sevian-Firouzja, or . . .

I didn't say "chess is nothing but boring draws", my point is about individual early drawn games.

I would assume that the players are not taking the viewers into consideration when making the decision to draw. If so, they shouldn't.

A perfect game of chess can only end in a draw.
Early draw offers are now prohibited by the Sofia rules.

Okay, but you'll have more fun if you'll focus on enjoying the *many* exciting games that are played.

Another way to think of this -- fifty or sixty years ago, there were two or three major tournaments a year. Now, on more days than not, you'll find some of the top players playing classical chess (to say nothing of rapid and blitz), and you can follow them in (close to) real time. It's not like we're hurting for great games to look at. The problem is keeping up with all the great ones there are.

They´re not there to entertain people, there are 2 places at the Candidates at stake.