Is it bad form to force a draw through repeated moves...

I'm not particularly proud of myself for doing it but if I don't / didn't force a draw here I'm likely to get mated in 2 or 3. 

http://www.chess.com/echess/game?id=71171238

I suspect this is not really the done thing, cos it's always seemed to me like a bit of a dud way to end a game. 

Thoughts? 

There is no shame in forcing a draw through repetition. Why lose if you can draw? Your opponent did not have a winning position if they could not avoid repetition. 

Forcing a draw if your are going to loose is fair and clever ; doing it if you shall win is stupid. Simple ^^

Chess is WAR.   DO whatever is legal to save the King!!

No, it's just part of the game.  Players who aren't aware of that idea may find it odd, but all experienced players look for or guard against this idea (depending on whether they're winning or losing ;).  It's seen as natural as any other maneuver.

Forcing a draw to avoid checkmate is always acceptable.

However, in that postion, you weren't about to be checkmated at all, and were actually a pawn up in an endgame with active rooks, and should have won easily, so forcing a draw there was a bit silly.

No,of course not.

did you consider 26. bxa4?

In a recent vote chess game and against a very strong team we had a position where we could take a draw by perpetual check.  Almost everyone on the team said that the other team is very strong and we should not chance a loss by refusing  the draw. I had to plead to allow me to try a way to win the game.  I also asked that no one  vote for a draw as I thought there was winning chances.

I player voted for a draw anyway "To protect the team"

Finally they allowed the game to continue.

This was a case where it would have been not "good form" to force a draw

by repetition.

Forcing a draw by repetition is never wrong as long as that is the result you want.  Personally, I would play 30.Rhd7 and try to win.

Why did you force the draw when you were up a pawn? Maybe it would have been a draw anyway, (rook endgames can be draw quite often) but you should have fought for the win, you can accept a draw in any case, but at least you would have tried your best in order to win the game.

It is a very good strategy to force a draw in a lost position, and you are lucky if you can do that. Moreover, there are lots of combinations which's goal is to force a draw. 

I have a problem with the wording... "force a draw through repetition"... seems like its some underhand strategy at play here... meaning his position is equal to yours because you both are bound by the move sequence.

1. Avoiding the sequence of moves by either would be fatal for him/her or illegal (in case of a perpetual check).

You will notice in GM chess how much they cover against repetitive draws, as was said before, its just part of strategy and a player in a lost position would sacrifice a piece to expose the enemy King and force a perpetual. Bad form would be to lose a game that you could have drawn.

I think 30. Rhg7+ Kh8 31. Rxa8 Rxa8 32. Rxg6 is an easy win.

super GMs force draws by repetition.nowadays we see three repetition of position a lot in their games. it is  part of the game and there is nothing embarrasing about it.

but your position wasnot in any danger.forexample:

37.Rxg6 Ra2+ 38.Kd1 Ree2 39.Rxd6 and it is black who has to give perpetual check.of course black could have forced a draw by 38...Ra1+ 39.Kd2 Ra2+ 40.Kd1 Ra1+ since 41.Kc2?? and then 41...Re2#

but i think after 37.Ra7! Rxa7 38.Rxa7 you had winning chances with a pawn up,your rook in 7th rank.black cannot activate his king and you plan 39.Rd7 Ra8 40.Rxd6 Ra2+ 41.Kd3 Rb2 42.Rxg6 Rxb3 43.Rf6+ Ke7 44.Rxf5 winning.

or 37...Kg8 38.Rhg7+ Kh8 39.Rxa8 Rxa8 40.Rxg6 

no, it is part of winning to make sure that there is perpetual check.

if your opponent think he is winning he should calculate to make sure that no repeated checks can happen. otherwise he does not deserve the win.

it is within good sportsmanship.

I kind of hoped this would happen - you're right of course. I had convinced myself the game was up. It was, once I got to my move 30. 

Yes, that would have won.  I originally thought that gives Black too much counterplay after 32...Ra3 but I was mistaken.  White can take on d6 and walk his K over in front of Black's passed pawn.  Then play g4, etc.

forcing a draw is for sore loser who are trying to protect there rating just call it what is !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

According to computer anylsis, a forced draw is equal, so you can't really say that you lost in a position where you can force a draw...

It is not bad form, it is a clever and sly way of closing a lost game.