Short Grandmaster Draws - Strategy or Tragedy?

The grandmaster draw is not a new phenomenon, and it probably isn't going away any time soon. The question is whether it is a good and acceptable tactic to use at the highest level, or if it is unadulterated bad sportsmanship and is something to be eliminated completely.

Grandmasters are the most accomplished players the game has to offer. They all know bucket loads of chess theory, and can see an obscene amount of moves ahead. Keeping those facts in mind, it is foreseeable that they will draw quite often when battling each other. But to call a chess game a draw in 12 or 13 moves is bordering on the ridiculous, if you ask me.

Granted, some opening lines are just "drawish" and at the GM level, they are fully aware of that. Which begs the question, why play that line, then? It makes it appear as if they want the draw. Well, they do, and here is why.

Once a player gets past the 2500 level in the awesome game of chess, things get a bit different. The wins are much harder to come by, and the losses hurt a little more than when they were class players or lower masters. It becomes a battle for game points, not necessarily rating points.

For instance, if a grandmaster has to play 6 rounds in a tournament and draws every game, he or she will receive 3 points guaranteed. If, however, the GM decides to play fighting chess and go for the win, they risk a loss which will net them no points for that round.

Therefore, the "grandmaster draw" in chess is pure strategy. It isn't exactly a sporting one, but it is their right and their choice. Should it be, though? It seems that tournament organizers are gearing toward limiting these short, high-end draws in chess, or even eliminating them altogether.

Some tournaments are implementing a no draw before 30 moves rule, which has proven to bring out some exciting chess! In fact, other tournaments have even stated that no draws are allowed before move forty. If this trend continues, we will see more beautiful games and fewer disappointments, to be sure.

Back in the Romantic Era of chess (basically, the time before computer analysis and established theory), every top player fought hard and tried for the win - heck, winning was the whole point of chess! Today, however, with so much known theory, and powerful chess engines that are used for game analysis and training, there doesn't seem to be much room for the creative attacking player - especially at the highest levels.

Is the grandmaster draw going to be the death of professional chess? Or are players such as Emory Tate (IM), Hikaru Nakamura, Gata Kamsky and Veselin Topalov destined to keep the fire in chess glowing with their never say die attitudes? What is your opinion? Are these draws just a natural part of chess, or should there be new rules set in place in an attempt to avoid them?

I have to ask myself what players like Morphy, Alekhine and Tal would think about a prearranged draw at the top levels of chess. Something tells me they would shake their heads, hunker down over the wooden board, and look hard for the knockout move that would immediately end the game. In other words, they would play chess. I believe that life isn't lived by playing it safe. Rather, it is experienced through taking chances risking failure. Otherwise, what's the point?