Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!


  • ppd
  • | Dec 11, 2012 at 5:58 PM
  • | Posted in: ppd's Blog
  • | 555 reads

Here are some rules of etiquette I have for online chess:

1. If both opponents are from English speaking countries and the loser says gg, then the winner should reply gg.  To not do so is a sign of disrespect.  If the winner says gg, the loser may choose to either say gg or not respond.

2. If the loser offers a rematch, the winner should try to accept if she or he has enough time.  If the winner offers a rematch, the loser is free to choose to accept or reject it. 

3. It is not proper to log off the website to avoid losing a game.  It is understandable if your Internet connection breaks during the game.  The losing party should either resign or play out the game.


  • 2 years ago


    Ok thanks for these comments.  I suppose we disagree on some of these points.  (But apparently not the third.)  I may also break these rules from time to time, but these are things I've noticed while playing.

  • 2 years ago


    So that's what 'gg' stands for!
    Now then; let me see if I have this right...  A winner who didn't believe it had been a 'good game', would have hisorher opinion disregarded and, instead, be compelled to agree with the loser's opinion.  Yet a winner who did believe it had been a 'good game', and said so, would still have herorhis opinion disregarded, simply by the loser ignoring the winner's comment.
    Matey, you can label that 'etiquette' if you like but it doesn't stop it from being an irrational and silly concept that reeks of tokenism!
    The point of most games, of course, is to win. Yes, it is nice to be a winner and to be congratulated and points are awarded and there is -at times- something of a warm inner-glow to be had, but that doesn't make every win a 'good game'. 'Think of beating someone far less able than yourself: are they 'good games' for you !?
    There... that's my take on the over-used, mis-used tag: 'gg'.

    As for the rest of your 'Etiquette Dictat'...

    2. "...the winner should try.....and....the loser is free..."
    Inconsistancies  such as these are in themselves enough to make your second point a nonsense. The concept itself is ridiculous.  Why? For gawd's sake man: WHY ! 
    3. Yes. So...? 

    I reckon that with more thought when setting your parameters, you may feel differently about 'Chess and Affirmative Action for Non-Winners'.

    staycooool mate!

  • 2 years ago


    1. Can't the winner just say "thank you" after the loser says gg?  If there were a number of blunders in the loser's game, it actually wasn't a gg.  I agree that the winner should respond, but the choice should be his. That's like hitting a golf ball way off course into the woods and saying "good shot."

    2. To play again should be a personal choice for both players. I don't see it as "fair" to hold the winner to another game, yet let the loser decide what he wants to do. If anything, the loser is the one at the disadvantage in calling any shots. For example -  In the 1972 WCCM (Fischer VS Spassky) in the event of a 12/12 score, the winner retains his title.

    3. I fully agree. The losing party should resign or play it out and not log off or sit and let the clock run and run with no intention of playing another move.

Back to Top

Post your reply: