maybe what they could do is have the arbiter have the lagging side give them a justification for their delay in a lost position, a mathmatical 'proof' of sorts. If they cannot furnish adequate lines of play that show hope, their game should be 'finalized by force', especially if the play category is 2000+. I am just a mediocre hack, but I can understand when a game is bust. No amount of stalling will make the chess truth at the board magically change into win. These rude players should be tourney banned upon repeat offences. There should be some sort of code of conduct for tournaments that players can follow.
About long games in tournamest - once again...
Sort:
yes, we need to work on this. i have adjudicated one of the games. i will do that for the other in a few days if you remind me :)
The 2nd round in the 3rd Chess.com Tournament (2001-2200) started. Thx, Erik!
The problem is that you can't plan a time-table of tournaments: I don't like to play many games simultaneously, maybe 15, two tournaments. Then, I expect thad 2nd round will start fas, and I desist some tournaments - however, then it didn't start next 3-4 months...
I think, it's possible to say that 4 month is a maximum for a game in a tournament with normal time of 3 days per move, and then, a committe of experts (people with rating >2400 or so) decided about games still in progress - in most cases, it is clear that it's draw or somebody is lost and they must not use more then few minutes. Sometimes, it can be more complicated and a discussion is needed, but they can to decide.
It seems very reasonable that, once the winner(s) of a round have been determined without any doubt, any games still in progress which could not conceivably affect the outcome of the larger pool should not hold up the start of the next round of play.
I think it's good to allow all players to finish all their games, especially as some players will want to take the chance to play higher rated opponents, however couldn't it be arranged so that once a group is decided the rest of the games become essentially friendlies and the tournament moves on automatically?
shakje wrote:
I think it's good to allow all players to finish all their games, especially as some players will want to take the chance to play higher rated opponents, however couldn't it be arranged so that once a group is decided the rest of the games become essentially friendlies and the tournament moves on automatically?
Exactly - let them finish out their games, and retain all potential point gains/losses - but also let the rest of the tournament move on once the outcome is clear.
Ah, missed what gent said, apologies.
None necessary - I probably could have stated it more clearly in the first place!
I agree. It seems that the tourney can go on before every single last insignificant game of round one is played out. As soon as the winner(s) of every group are known for sure, the next round should begin and the other game can continue at the leasure of the other players.
After two weeks, it the same : French Defence Open Tournament, 1st round, only one game is still in progress. It's near to three months after the last game before it was concluded. White, munchkin, has rook and two pawns less, and still won't not to resign. 43 players, who qualified for the 2nd round, wait the end of this game. 
We started 8 month ago! And I afraid, when the 3rd round started, I will can't play... for I will need to carry for my grandchildren... 
it's actually even more silly since the result of that match cannot affect who goes through from that group and so the second round could kick off. I think I read somewhere that for the future in that scenario the second round could go ahead.
This is why I don't like playing in big tourno's...
I understand why there is vacation time and I have used it for a few days myself once or twice. However, I do think something should be done about use of vacation time in tournaments. Maybe it could be limited to a few days per tournament or something. The problem is, the auto-proptection for paying members is important (that is part of the reason why some people pay) - I just think it gets abused in tournaments. I am involved in some tournaments where they have been going on so long I can hardly remember when they started.
game adjudicated.
The length of tournaments has been corrupted by mainly vacation time. Hence the fix would be to ban the use of vacation time for future tourney play. It seems reasonable, entering and understanding this simple rule prior to participating. The alternative for me is to avoid them status quo. New entries should have some kind of standard set---the length of some of these games is just ridiculous. I hear your pain Lydia...
In the French Defence Open Tournament, 1st round, only one game is still in progress. Only one game - last two monts, for the last before the last was concluded two months ago! The tournament started 16th of May last year and I didn't remember my games. And all that time, in the last game - white has a rook less, and reject to resign,and he can play next 30-40 days. This game decided nothing - 1st and 2nd place in their group is clear. Ane we, who cualified fot the next round, need to wait this game to conclude... And the winer of the tournament will be the last surviver, for all other will dye...
It's similar in the 3rd Chess.com Tournament (2001-2200). Only one game last 29 days - all of us wait - fortunatelly, it wiil be mate in 2 moves.
It's ridiculous. The system of playing tournaments need to be improved.