Anyone else begs for draw as last deperate effort?

If you are going insane over elo loss then just play unrated

True, but he has compensations, like lots and lots of initiative. And well, don't he control the center?

I've never allowed takebacks.
Never asked for one.
Never asked for a draw in a losing position nor a winning one.
What does happen is things like King and rook versus King and rook with nothing else on the board and somebody asks for a draw.
Usually - of course the game should be ended then and there with draw agreed.
But - that doesn't always happen.

Sometimes one player unsportsmanly refuses the draw.

But what if one player has very little time left on his clock?
Should the other player give a draw?
That other player might have worked hard and skillfully pressuring the other player causing that other player struggles and burning time on his clock ...
its very common that one player is more efficient and the higher the level of play - the more a skillful player can use his opponent's clock time.
Conclusion: there would be controversy ...

True, but he has compensations, like lots and lots of initiative. And well, don't he control the center?

Yes, but he can't manoeuvre. All he can do is try to bite their legs off.

He can taunt a whole lot.

He can taunt a whole lot.

Yes, in chess the psychological factor is totally underestimated.

Plus, think about it: since he's Black, he stands his ground while the "White" guy flees after unsuccesfully attacking him. That's a win.

Indeed. They really should have accepted his offer of a draw...

Cowards are just everywhere.

I once offered a draw against a National Master with a pawn and rook for both sides. He was so angry about being absolutely destroyed in the opening by a 1200 Elo and having to fight to survive that he made me prove I could draw the game. I did that in two moves.

i am dying reading this

Yes, seriously. You might want to consider the Slav. It's real good.

Yes - Slav is solid.
c6 can even be played on move 1 for black. d4 c6 c4 d5.
Idea: in the Queen's Gambit Accepted - usually black just gives back the pawn.
d4 d5 c4 dxc ...
But in the Slav - if black takes at c4 at an early point in the opening - is he threatening to hold that pawn?
Its off the forum subject though - maybe there's forums about the Slav somewhere.

Not anymore. I resign since I win more than I lose.

When I've lost a piece early - unless there's a lot of compensation for the piece I've just resigned fast.
Why waste time on such a game?
In a tournament game that might be different. Might be.
In my blitz games over the years - if somebody didn't resign in a very lopsided position - I've often just taken all their pieces and promoted to six knights or something like that and then proceeded towards mating with the knights.
Three knights wins - but not without the assistance of the winning King.
Four knights can win on their own.
Opponents often resign when faced with the process of getting mated by several knights.
Others get furious. Foolishly.
Others get mated.

Chess is a game of skill rather than luck and there are always opportunities to improve and learn from each game, regardless of the outcome.

Skill is more emphasized in chess than in poker but poker is very much a skill game nonetheless.
In all sports there's elements of luck and skill.
Chess has no 'sanctity' or 'purity' from luck.
There's no 'aura' around it.
One might find that in all elements of life there's both skill and luck.
/////////////////
This is related to determinism and fatalism.
One can't control everything.
But usually one has some options and ability to affect outcomes.
Sometimes partially - sometimes completely.
Exception: people in coma. Or terminal coma if that one isn't strong enough.

Real

Incredible news!!! I do Still beg For draws Wins are sparse and ELO is leaking and Leaking iM not allowed even 600 ELo now Game is rigged cant win