Chess players think of chess as a fair game, they take pride in it: kings and paupers start on an equal footing. Just not on this site!

The rich are able to buy various premium memberships with various amounts of extra 'vacation time'. In effect, they can stand up and shout "stop the clock" whenever they feel like it while their poor opponent doesn't have the same luxury.

The two players have agreed to the same time-controls but surely this should include stop-the-clock time?

"The Rich"? I certainlay wouldn't class myself as that. Besides, why should one not get extra services for monies paid? On a couple of occasions, I've been away from home for longer than I expected, unable to get to a computer. Chess.com graciously suspends my games until I can return, which is a service I've paid for. It clearly states in the membership breakdown the services you receive upon payment, which leaves you with the option of either paying or dealing with it. Besides, chess.com is by far the best chess website I've come accross, they deserve the money I've paid them.

Thanks for your comments ErrantDeeds, You make good points and I'll take them on board.

  I'm still not happy with the situation here. I have no problem with peripheral services and paying for extras. What is WRONG is starting a chess game on unequal terms because of monies paid. That's like saying pay more and have an extra move. I think they should keep the extras at a distance and leave the game poised between two honourable players on a level playing field.

Hmmm... You clearly feel you've been mistreaded by other users on occasion. The best thing I can suggest is that if you feel another player is acting in a dishonest or unfair manner, report it to the staff.

As an aside, I was on holiday in august and foolishly thought I would have access to the internet. I was mistaken. All of my games, including some tournement games in the endgame, went to vacation, and some were stuck there for a week. I felt so bad for my opponants that I resigned them all as soon as I got back.

adam,

chill dude, it's just a game of internet chess, not some life or death moral issue.

regards.

I agree Adam the field should be level.

 I also feel frustration with stalling opponents but I don't believe that vacation gives anyone a competitive advantage unless winning on on a technicality "Winning on Time" is what you are looking for. 

Assuming that the term "Fair Game" means that each opponent brings only their intellect to the game and doesn't use outside help, I don't think using vacation makes the game unfair.  If fact when I run into someone using vacation for what I believe to be the purpose of stalling they are typically in a hopeless loosing position.  So intellectually the game is still "fair" but it is frustrating. 

You always have the option of starting new games yourself using Create New Game - Show Advanced Options then filter on player move speed <3 Hours and Max Timeout %.  This way you can filter out players who tend to drag things out.  

Managing your clock is part and parcel of the game for me. 

This isn't GM level, Olympic or World Championship CC.  I doubt anybody is using vacation time to delve ever deeper into the intricities of the position and thus gain an advantage, winning move, swindle or drawing resource. 

If it really is suck a bone of contention join a no vacation tourney or go someplace like FICS.  Remember, that player who paid for and got the extra vacation time, is also the one keeping this site afloat so that those who do not pay can still play here.

"This isn't GM level, Olympic or World Championship CC.  I doubt anybody is using vacation time to delve ever deeper into the intricities of the position and thus gain an advantage, winning move, swindle or drawing resource. "

What has level of play got to do with losing a game on time?  Weird.

"If it really is suck a bone of contention join a no vacation tourney or go someplace like FICS.  Remember, that player who paid for and got the extra vacation time, is also the one keeping this site afloat so that those who do not pay can still play here."

So you would prefer potential customers to leave rather than complain about a niggle.  Great business sense you have there pal.

Well, if you're going to quote me, use my name.  Business sense?  I'm a customer not a provider but I don't see a potential customer here, I see someone trying to get more for less which means someone else must get less for more. Costs have to be covered somewhere.  As for level of play affecting amount of time used per move being a weird concept....

"Well, if you're going to quote me, use my name. "

I'll quote you any way I see fit bud.

"Business sense?" 

A phrase you are uncommon with?

" I see someone trying to get more for less which means someone else must get less for more."

What are you mumbling on about?  Crazy stuff.

"Costs have to be covered somewhere. "

So your are answer is to tip the playing field to encourage membership?  Excellent.

Hopefully, and I'd like to believe, such a poor attitude isn't reflected by this sites purveyors.

I don't think vacation time give an advantage on the board.  Even if the game is paused for a week the player who play the best game will win.  The autoprotection is another thing.  It effectively advantages the one who have it but only to a small extend.  Maybe it should be offer to anybody.

Beside that you have to face the fact that for this web site to go on some people have to pay money.  Personnaly I pay almost only for the vacation time because 30 days isn't enough for me.  It vacation time for premium was the same as for basic members I would stop paying right now.  Probably many other people would do the same.  I think chess.com would lose more members than it would get by leveling vacation time.

Finaly their is always the option of playing other basic members or playing no vacation tournements.  You have the choice.

I don't see the problem.  Both sides have vacation time; both sides can go on vacation at any time during the game.  When you joined Chess.com, you knew that Premium Members received extra vacation time, and that their vacation time was implemented automatically.  If you find this objectionable, you have the option of not playing on this site.

Try wearing glasses.

 For someone who brings mention of poor attitude into the discussion, you seem to be trying to insult CarlMI by ignoring a request for a simple courtesy.  There is a "QUOTE" button in every post for a reason...  So that this type of exchange can be more easily followed by all.  I see by your Member Points (2121) that you are not new to this, so I can only conclude that this is an intentional slight. 

To the topic at hand, the use of vacation time does not give a player the advantage of another move, just the convenience of scheduling the next move around his/her personal schedule.  If you would like to pay for that convenience, you also have that option.  In this regard, the playing field is exactly level as every player has the same options to upgrade their account.  Your choice. 

I chose to upgrade.  Others have decided not to.  Each of us has the conditions we've selected, so complaining about your choice only implies that you need to make decisions that better fit your needs.

Brian

ndchessnut:

" For someone who brings mention of poor attitude into the discussion, you seem to be trying to insult CarlMI by ignoring a request for a simple courtesy.  There is a "QUOTE" button in every post for a reason...  So that this type of exchange can be more easily followed by all.  I see by your Member Points (2121) that you are not new to this, so I can only conclude that this is an intentional slight. "

Nonsense, what a poor assumption.

If you can, direct me to towards guidelines referring to the etiquette surrounding forum quotations and I'll shall direct you and the author to the nearest psychiatrist.

"In this regard, the playing field is exactly level as every player has the same options to upgrade their account.  Your choice. " 

I wonder if Anand turns up to the next tournament and pays the organisers for the privilege of not having to play to the clock whilst his opponents do.  To your wisdom that would be fair since his opponents also had the option of paying the organisers?  Is this your idea of a level playing field?

You must be such an enlightened being, your logic certainly has me baffled.

Your argument is nonsense.

If you sit OTB across from someone who has a private coach, is that unfair?

What a ridiculous straw man that is.  No-one's bribing chess.com for privileges no-one else has.  There is complete transparency on this issue, plus the option is available to anyone willing to upgrade their account and If you're really concerned about and don't want to upgrade your account it the option is also there for you to only play other non-premium members.

I don't disagree that there's a slight advantage that could be conferred here, but I don't think it's at all material or worth getting anything close to this worked up over.

NDchessnut:

Remember the quote: "Never get into a wrestling match with a pig. You both get dirty -- and the pig likes it."  I find it useful in the forums.  Having a discussion with a willfully obstinate avatar is a waste of time.  Unfortunately it takes a couple posts to spot them and they get emboldened by others courtesy.  So I'll pay my money, get my auto vacations and enjoy my games.