I just want to say Perseus I completely respect your opinion even if I disagree with it. You said, "You could also accept that someone cheated, not let it bother you much, 'protest' only to inform the relevant authorities and get on with your chess.", Which I have done and played several tournaments since. The point of this thread is to educate other players, debate this problem, come up with possible solutions, and improve tournament chess in general in America. I have to point out that I am not the only one who has written about this particular incident. Using this wonderful medium called the internet, which gives even the little guy a voice. Here is a link to a post by tgaul who I barely know and I think gives a entirely different and complete perspective to the incident.

StLChess.com • View topic - Westport Flea Market Open

I think you're probably talking about this on the wrong forum. Issues like this aren't banned from being discussed her, but I think you'll have better luck finding people who are interested in the situation and might be in a position to help if you bring this up on the USCF discussion forums instead.

--Fromper

Thanks for the input Fromper, I may do that. It is a touchy subject which has basically ripped the Kansas City chess scene in two, even before I played in that tournament. I didn't think about putting it under USCF discussion forum probably because I think the USCF is irrevocably broken as an institution. And that if the problem is going to be solved it'll probably be done on a local level, by people, through our state chess associations.

I feel that those two conspirators should be put on the dumbest criminals show. It's unfortunate that, with all due respect to the TD, he himself should be put on the dumbest law enforcers show. The reason being is that if you wanted to prearrange a draw, at least make it more than 5 moves, please. UNLESS, of course, the moves are 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Nxe5 d6 4. Nf3 Nxe4 5. d4 d5

Of course, there is not enough elegible proof, but still, I think it's quite obvious.

Well, prearranged draws aren't limited to the USA, I know that for a fact. Good to hear you didn't let it get in your way, I misread your earlier posts as that you did. At any rate, the link helped getting your point across.
At any rate, one can only control half of his own games.

A small point, but in this particular case the short draw didn't occur in the last round but in the 3rd round of a five round tournament. I forgot to put this little detail in my original post. Tgaul talks about it though in his post at: StLChess.com • View topic - Westport Flea Market Open
And just because there is a precedent doesn't make it right, and I agree changing it would put a lot of top players in an uproar because a lot of them cheat (not all of them) using the short draw.

Directed a tmt in 2003 and wrote to USCF about not rating a 2.5 move draw between a GM and an IM. They completely ignored me and as a consequence my tournaments were 'blacklisted' by GM's for about 3 years,

You can read about my complaint at Dayton TD protests 3-move draw! and also of interest is a link
GM Ashley's essay questions ethics of quick draw offers
to an article discussing GM Maurice Ashley's take on this same topic.

Recently at a national event - 2 GMs marked a draw without even going throught the effort of faking a game. The td marked it a double forfiet. Someone told the GMs and as a result they sat down and played a short (10 moves or so) GM draw and got 1/2 point each.



Interesting it happened in the 3rd round though.

I wonder how many people would be playing if they had to play like we did back when I started. No class sections or accelerated parings. The first round was a gimme for the top half of the players. As a 1600 I lost many a first round game to a master or high expert. $10 EF’s got you $100 first prize. If you were top in your class you got a book or a cheap trophy. One never saw a GM playing unless it was the US Open or similar major event. Nowadays it’s all about the money.

I do remember one adjourned game where I had the help of an IM who showed me how to draw my ending of a Q vs. Q&P. Half the players in the event were standing around watching him tutor me. Nobody thought anything about it in those days.

I'm reminded of a debate I had on chess.com about whether or not books should be allowed in correspondence games. If you've got a break in the game, why should it be against the rules to spend your time studying chess books that might happen to apply to your game? If I had a correspondence game, and I could see that it was heading for an endgame that I don't know how to play, I'd pull out an endgame book. The same goes for openings. And in the case of adjournments, I don't see why you would be forbidden from consulting all available references, though I would expect it to be a general endgame less from that IM, not specific to your particular position.

On the topic of short draws, the most obvious I ever saw were two IM's who carpooled together for the hour drive to a big tournament, and they were paired against each other for the morning game on the final day of the tourney. They showed up an hour late, sat down at the table against each other for maybe 5 minutes, and drew. I don't know how many moves it was, but it was pretty obviously prearranged.

--Fromper

RileyD, I just wanted to thank you for your post. It confirms what I already believe, that the USCF is either unable or unwilling to address the issue of short draws and the ease in which this practice is being used to cheat in OTB chess. Your link to GM Maurice Ashley's article is very enlightening. I believe Ashley's point is even if these games are not being prearranged it appears that they are, and this is bad for chess in general. The widespread adoption of the sofia rules (where a minimum of 30 moves must be made) or the Bilbao Rules (3 points for win, 1 point for a draw) should be adopted by every state chess association in America.