Vacations To Avoid Losing On Time Is Cheating!

You don't get an analysis board in live chess. You are allowed one, or many, in correspondence chess and from what I gather online chess at chess.com is supposed to be or at least mimic real correspondence chess. If you want to simulate OTB chess over the Internets, then play live chess; if you want to play correspondence chess online, play online chess.

 I absolutely 100% aggree!  It will hurt OTB play.  This feature should never have been!

Let's not forget, though, that the conditional moves interface works much like an illegal-move-restricted analysis board and if it were used more it would help the very problem this thread is actually about -- do you also consider the use of conditional moves "cheating"?

I agree above that CC chess should, in my opinion, show the players last move and if the game needed to be analyzed, it should be reviewed after the game.  Nothing is perfect, and I can live with it because this site has brought a lot of joy to my spare time.

Correspondance chess and over the board chess are totally different animals, I don't think the arguments about the analysis board hold up. Correspondance chess is interesting because of the depth of the ideas required to win, because both you and your opponent can analyse far ahead with the analysis board it'll take something special to win. So if you don't make an effort to analyse ahead, what's the point of even playing a game where you have several days to move? Over the board chess is exciting because of precisely the opposite, you can't calculate everything out to a final conclusion, so there's a degree of uncertainty. So if you feel the analysis board is "cheating" in some way, just play regualar over the board tournaments or real time games online.

I agree with SMoran90.  Using the analysis board is no different to setting up the position on a 3d board, which is what correspondence chess is all about. Does it help your OTB visualisation or hinder it because you get lazy, quite possibly it hinders or even probably if you use it all the time, but it's certainly not cheating.  You need to ask yourself are you playing here to practice to get better for OTB or are you playing to get better at Correspondence.  One can equally make the argument that using a book or opening explorer during a game spoils your OTB as you are not relying on memory.

To me the difference in how much or little people use the opening dbase plus the analysis board can explain the differences between chess.com ratings of players with similar ratings OTB.

One thing the analysis board gives over a real board is the ability to easily find your way back to the start position without laying a trail of breadcrumbs. I used to use one large board with the main position and a couple of travel sets to analyse/study variations.

What I didn't agree with (and there were some threads where this was discussed with Erik the site owner) was the ability to use the board to check for illegal moves, since this clearly isn't available with a real board.  However the site felt differently, fair enough.

This topic brings out the worst in people.

 I agree. Envy is an ugly thing to behold.

Actually, these are all a difference of opinion or rather a difference of mindset.

Nothing are able to come close to OTB chess play.

Playing on line or live game at chess.com is purely recreational and having some fun in chess out of the modern technology/IT. Maybe to some extend, it is a less risky game to play whenever a person wish to venture into a new and different repertoire (as I rather would), and make some analysis after the game.

All this you can have for FREE.If you wish to enjoy the better of all these services, of course you have to pay something for it. (Not everything is free).

Honesty, I've been a regular visitor of other chess websites and as far as I'm concerned, chess.com is now my # 1 chess website. (I had been an inactive member of other chess websites for quite sometime now).

Chess.com has a more personal touch that I didn't find in other chess websites. (But again, different people may have a different opinion on his matter).

Use of automatic vacation is obviously not "cheating" as it is a part of how chess.com is set up. I am not sure there is a great distinction of someone who because they are about to run out of time sets “manually” that they are on vacation. I am sure that some players use “vacation” time so that their average time per move as shown on their home page is low and so they have more time to think about their moves.

I agree that non-automatic vacation does make sure someone manages their time. But if you really want people to manage their time do not allow any vacations! (I play in several chess web sites and so have never used vacation time.) But this I think is probably too extreme, as vacations are not just for emergencies or actual holidays, but are so people can also have a break from chess.

I think automatic vacation is a good inducement to become paying member (which I am not yet). I agree it is not a “level playing field” but that is one of the inducements to become a paying member!

I also think if not going to have automatic vacations, then there should be no automatic wins on time ie everyone has to claim their win if an opponent has lost on time. Regardless of automatic vacations or not, I am not sure there should be any automatic wins on time. 

Yes, but they also did not traditionally tell you if you were sending an illegal conditional move -- the conditional moves board here does.  The point I'm making is that if chess.com were to remove the illegal-move-restriction from the analysis board, they would also need to address the fact that the conditional moves board also provides this restriction.

Another suggestion:

In order to disincentivise premium members from actually falling back on their timeout protection, what if their vacation burned off at twice the rate when it was not initiated manually?

It certainly doesn't solve the problem, but it would hopefully mitigate it's use.

I've personally only fallen back on my timeout protection a couple of times, and even then only for a half-an-hour at a time because I initially didn't realize it kicked in with up to two hours left -- I feel it's disrespectful to my opponent unless I'm actually on vacation, at which point I set it manually anyway

Its a fair call Bidari.

Ive not encountered this (yet)

Is there a minimum vacation time period proposed to minimise potential abuse.

Losing by time outs (over 200) seems no big deal for some.

Thank You

John Boy

Although an interesting idea, this does make it a little unfair to those that do actually need it- if your internet connection gets taken out for a couple of days, through no fault of your own, for example. (Nobody say 'Go find an internet cafe', or some similar vein, as I do not know of any internet cafe [at ALL] in Hampshire.)

(Also, TheGrobe, sorry if it looks like I'm going round poking holes in your comments today!)

No worries -- it's a straw-man -- tear it down and build a better one.

I personally don't see the issue with a lost Internet connection burning up your vacation time at twice the rate -- if it's enough of a concern users will find a way to make their moves, which I think is what we want.  In a real emeregency, the rate at which your vacation burns is probably not your primary concern.

When I broached the topic of the analysis board above (specifically, my distaste for the legal-move enforcement), it was just as an example of how my personal beliefs are just that -- personal. 

Although I'm within my rights to argue that the system should behave otherwise, I go too far when I say that someone using feature X or feature Y is cheating/unethical/inconsiderate/etc.  Tellingly, the next couple of posts after mine more or less ignored legal move enforcement and argued that ANY analysis board is a bad thing.  Point made - which is that I don't think people spend enough time considering just how subjective their own points of view are, or how many different types of players use this site:

Correspondence Chess Traditionalist - This player doesn't care how long a game takes or whether or not their opponent immediately acts on a triggered conditional move - in fact they probably won't even notice.  They may log into the site, notice that it's their move in four or five games, decide they are too tired to do any hard thinking and read forums for a while instead.  They may spend 5-10 minutes or more on a single move and will use the Analysis Board to 'go deep' on selected lines.  They use openings references also, always looking to use CC games as an opportunity for a more 'academic' or educational playing experience.  They may move more quickly in the opening or where the position is clear than in cases where there is complexity or risk.  They are grateful to the Internet for saving them $$ on postage.  (For the record, this is pretty much me.)

Accelerated Dragons - These folks look for an e-chess experience that more closely resembles OTB or Live Chess.  They may play fewer games than the Traditionalist, but they always expect a game to end in a matter of days or weeks.  In some (but not all) cases, they may eschew the use of reference material or visualization aids, but their reasons for doing so vary:  Some simply see themselves as casual players and don't worry too much about each move; others see databases and/or visualization aides as 'crutches' that may actually undermine a person's ability to think for themselves in a "real" (i.e. OTB) chess game.

Simul Addicts - This relatively rare breed is driven to push the limits of chessic endurance by entertaining hundreds or sometimes thousands of simultaneous games.  In terms of their values around reference material, they may fall more toward either of the two camps above, but their defining characteristic is the sheer volume of games they play at once.  Of necessity, this forces a certain discipline on them, in terms of timing.  Each day, they move in X games, starting with the ones where they have the least time remaining.  They play one move per game at a time; they can't afford to invest too much time in any one game, so regardless of whether a conditional move is triggered they usually *must* move on, having reset their per-move clock for that game.  For obvious reasons, this breed is anathema to the Accelerated Dragons.

...etc.  It's silly & unscientific I know, but I could probably also describe some others, like "The Learner" (who never resigns, for instance) and so on.  None of these people are intrinsically inconsiderate, unethical or even impatient.  They are just operating from a different set of values about how best to experience the game of chess at chess.com.

- Describe your own values on your profile

- If you are a Dragon, check people's time-per-move (etc.) before accepting a game with them.  Likewise, be mindful of time controls for Team Matches and Tournaments.  The site already provides events specifically for people with a history of making moves quickly.

- Seek out Groups that share your values.

This would be a great article!

Personally, I'm more of a Dragon, but sometimes when I come home late or really tired, I usually just look at the board for a few seconds "thinking" about the "best line", and move.

 Why do you think you would be going too far?

My opinion is that it does too far since 1) it's not cheating if it is part of the rules 2) vacation or "time out" has been a part of correspondence chess for a long time, just like analysis boards and opening books and so it is hard to say that it is unethical (ethics, and any supposed ethics in chess, would be a subjective matter anyway) and 3) it is hardly inconsiderate, given that any player that agrees to play at this site has the capacity and the ability to inform himself about the features, rules, and regulations of the game as it is played here and therefore should be reasonably certain of what to expect.

I guess because not only would I be imposing my personal values about how the site should be used; I'd also be drawing some pretty dubious and rather personal conclusions about the character of individuals who are (mostly) guilty only of not seeing things my way.

In other news, I've totally been getting this thread confused with that other one about "ethics" in correspondence chess, so sorry if I've seemed off-topic.