Here's what I think:
It really isn't bad manners if your opponent times out if you are losing and you don't want to resign because of that. It is all just part of the game. Honestly, you can just let him time out if you want to. It doesn't have to do with proper etiquette or anything like that, it's just playing the game. A lot of people do this, and it isn't bad manners if you let your opponent time out if you are in a losing position.
No, it exists for a reason. The timer isn't just a pretty decoration.
Both the players were given same clock time to play with. In blitz games time works as a devil resource which players must use very sensibly so as to bring better move in shorter time. Your opponent took more and more time to bring out good moves which forced you in bad position. Doing so he/she utilised his/her resource poorly. If you resign on moral grounds, it will be injustice to only yourself. Because it was a game where you played for alloted 5 minutes(say) and your opponent won playing 5:30 or 6 minutes. Anyway if your opponent thinks that he should have been the real winner, both of players can resolve the issue in a time unbound match.
Aren't you agree, that if you have just king and opponent has total material advantage (like pawns and few pieces) and you win by time - you will feel pretty shitty about your win?
Absolutely not in blitz and bullet - in bullet the most important pieces are 1. The King 2. The clock 3. Initiativ and attacking changes.
The Golden bullet rule: Move first, Think later
In longer games for exsample 2 hours it is bad if the position is draw or lost for you. But a win is a win!
"including the personal/psychological tactics one may employ in order to try and gain an edge."
There are psychological/personal ways to play the opponent on the board that don't involve twisting pieces (which ruins the felt over time). For example, I have a friend (who I always defeat) who is willing to sacrifice castling just to take queens off the board early because he knows I like them and the complicated positions that require them. He knows I like open positions so sometimes he'll try forging a wedge via f4 + d4 or c4 + e4. Then again this same friend falls for many of the same "tricks" (such as Fool's Mate) so his understanding of the board is lacking. I frequently have him do do-overs because he'd either lose a piece or needlessly improve my position via h6/h3 and Nf3/Nf6 and I gain a free move.
I only hate it when a scrub "wins on time" while he has only 5 seconds on the clock, but makes superfluous moves to increase his timer (game with time increment).
Never playing a game with time increments again. At least, not online.
Aren't you agree, that if you have just king and opponent has total material advantage (like pawns and few pieces) and you win by time - you will feel pretty shitty about your win?
Anybody will feel bad. But feeling bad must not ruin the senses. Only thing one can think at that time is he will play better next time. If it is a blitz or bullet game clock matters.
Aren't you agree, that if you have just king and opponent has total material advantage (like pawns and few pieces) and you win by time - you will feel pretty shitty about your win?
It would be a draw, not a win
Both the players were given same clock time to play with. In blitz games time works as a devil resource which players must use very sensibly so as to bring better move in shorter time. Your opponent took more and more time to bring out good moves which forced you in bad position. Doing so he/she utilised his/her resource poorly. If you resign on moral grounds, it will be injustice to only yourself. Because it was a game where you played for alloted 5 minutes(say) and your opponent won playing 5:30 or 6 minutes. Anyway if your opponent thinks that he should have been the real winner, both of players can resolve the issue in a time unbound match.
I think, it a best answer to topic
I totally agree with it
I totally agree that it's nonesense to accuse someone of bad sportsmanship just becouse you spent to much time in average per move. If you lost a game on time, my advise is: Learn from it,dud! The clock is there for a reason:) I tend to lose more games on time then win on time. No reason to be mad at your opponent? It's my own damn fault anyway. Then I'll be more furious at myself for wasting to much time in a good position. Even some players at the highest order lose games on time as a bad habit, Radjabov who played in the candidates this year lost equal games more then once during that tournament...
Aren't you agree, that if you have just king and opponent has total material advantage (like pawns and few pieces) and you win by time - you will feel pretty shitty about your win?
In these cases, if your opponent runs out of time the game is a draw by insufficient material. There are a bunch of threads discussing this on the forums.
Aren't you agree, that if you have just king and opponent has total material advantage (like pawns and few pieces) and you win by time - you will feel pretty shitty about your win?
In these cases, if your opponent runs out of time the game is a draw by insufficient material. There are a bunch of threads discussing this on the forums.
Let's add one pawn to your King to make it "no draw" by law. I did mention "one king" metaphorically. I agree - what most people saying. I agree - if you have 2 from 10 min left and your opponent run of time. But if you have 10 sec left and win by time having totally lost position - it is not quit taste good in my opinion and more fair to agree for draw.
I think the key point to remember is that one does not "win on time", but rather, one loses on time. If an opponent blames you or the clock for their loss, then they are misguided about the point of the clock to begin with.
I always thought you got credit for winning that way. 
The problem with many of us mortal players is that we don't take enough time per position and play a 60 minute per side or 6 hour game as if it were blitz. When you learn to take your time then you practice time management.
Aren't you agree, that if you have just king and opponent has total material advantage (like pawns and few pieces) and you win by time - you will feel pretty shitty about your win?
In these cases, if your opponent runs out of time the game is a draw by insufficient material. There are a bunch of threads discussing this on the forums.
Let's add one pawn to your King to make it "no draw" by law. I did mention "one king" metaphorically. I agree - what most people saying. I agree - if you have 2 from 10 min left and your opponent run of time. But if you have 10 sec left and win by time having totally lost position - it is not quit taste good in my opinion and more fair to agree for draw.
Just because you have material does not make it a win. The fide rules state that you have to be able to win 'against the most unskilled counterplay'
just get over the idea that it is ever bad manners to win on time...time is part of the game and must be managed, just like every other piece...
perhaps the thought should be that it is very bad manners to lose on time
So I was having a discussion with a friend the other day, in which we were talking about Chess tournament play, including the personal/psychological tactics one may employ in order to try and gain an edge.
I maintained that if I were in a lost position, but my opponent was in severe time trouble, I would just hang on and wait for a possible blunder that might let me back into the game. My friend, however, said that this isn't showing proper etiquette, and that in a lost position you're 'supposed' to resign because its polite and that its just 'what you do'.
Am I the only one who thinks this is nonsense? This is proper tournament play we're talking about here, and I think it ludicrous to not grasp for every possible half-point in this manner. Why on earth would I accept a loss when I can get a possible draw, or even a win if my opponent screws up badly enough? And even if he doesn't, do I somehow not deserve the win just because his flag fell first? I've played plenty of Blitz games where I've lost on time in this manner, and I think its just something you have to deal with.