14772 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
No woman, no cry...No woman, no cry...
funny, this question coming from you since you're one of them. I'm sure you figured it out then. THEY ARE SCARED TO LOSE!
I think your question is wrongly formulated. You say “rematch” when what you apparently mean is “immediate rematch”. Most active opponents of within 200 points of one’s own rating one comes across again sooner or later, and one is then willing to play them unless they stand out in memory for rudeness or some other objectionable quality. I find as some of your other commenters do that after a lightning game I almost always need a break; and the first thing I do in it is normally look up my opponent’s home page. If he doesn’t give his real name I don’t play him again until such time as I’ve forgotten.
Who or what is the “Milgram” you refer to?
There is also the point that what 97% of people do should probably be regarded as normal behaviour.
I almost never offer rematches. On the rare occasions when I do , it's usually rejected.
There are times you know a rematch is coming. If you beat a player quite a bit bigger than you, they tend to want another game. Somehow I feel honor bound. Sometimes you fall into a nice conversation, which normally leads to a rematch. Interesting games will get a rematch as well.
I neither offer nor accept rematches with the 106% of players whom I suspect of cheating, the 187% of players who serve up garbage, and the uncountable players who require more than four moves to checkmate with two queens. Rematches offers from anyone who diables chat, or who chats during a three minute game are routinely ignored.With all the rest, I almost never offer, but usually accept rematches.
many reasons for this prob all covered in previous threads but it doesnt always mean they are scared of you or your abilities if ii lose to a player i want revenge but if the previous game drained me i want coffee and a cigarette not another head to head
I am far more likely to accept a rematch if the player is friendly. Do they say something in the chat?
I've found that people who just automatically rematch after a loss are more likely to be unsportsmanlike. There are people who will rematch you until they win, and then talk smack. Sometimes you'll rematch them a couple of times and then finally refuse one (especially if you keep winning) and they'll get mad at you.
So it's often easier to just refuse. Avoid the confrontaiton. Actually, I don't even always refuse, I just click new game and play who I play.
The difference is if somebody is being friendly and social. Then I'm inclined to think the rematch request means that they like talking to me and I'm more likely to keep playing. It doesn't take a lot, but, "Good move!" if I play a nice sacrifice, or "well played" after a game, or even a "whoops" if they blunder. That kind of thing makes me think that you're the kind of person who wants a rematch for nice reasons rather than because you're looking for an opportunity to be a jerk. So does resigning promptly rather than making me play out an obvious ending.
I'd be curious. Try it: Next time you lose, say "Nice game," and something specific and complimentary about how they beat you. Then ask for the rematch. I'll bet you get more rematches.
I usually decline rematches (I'd not want them to think we're going 'steady').
That really may make all the difference. People who are trying to quickly soothe a bruised ego are less likely to show basic social courtesies.
I never say no to a rematch if i have time to play. No matter the rating nor the taste or the outcome of the previous match. If you were face to face with your opponenet and he proposed a rematch, would you say no in his face? Would be a bit weird right? Also in times i've said something like ''could you wait 10 mins for the rematch?'' wich 98% is acceptable.
If I decide to play live,(rare, for which will become clear soon,) I will only ever play one game. It doesn't matter which color I get, or if I lose or win. I don't do blitz or bullet, so a 15/10 is about as fast as I'm willing to play. To me, that's too fast anyway, but whatever. I have to arrange a thirty minute block of time where I pretty much can't be interrupted to do that. With two kids, a wife, and life that is on constant overdrive, getting that thirty minute block of time is like arranging the universe. That's why I generally stick to online, so I can look at the board, think, get up, take care of a situation at home, etc. .... It's never personal if I play live. It simply will be one game only.
Kardinal, maybe it is related to your tendency to write rude comments on people's wall?
There is no rule that says a person must do a rematch, therefore it is voluntary. If a person doesnt, what gives you the right to message, and belittle that person? Then to add insult to injury you block the person so they cant repond to your childish rant. Grow up and get a life and realize that everyone does not think or act like you and that is perfectly ok. If you try to remember that maybe your panties wont be bunched up all the time!
For me its if in the first game in short time controls a person plays immediate queen moves or fools mate looking for quick checks leading to mistakes rather then solid opening theory/ fundaments leading to a strategic miscalculation. basically moves that would not be played with longer time controls. So we played, you did the damn thing, and you won/lost. A player who's tactics were not deliberately trickish/trappish I almost always accept a rematch out of politeness.
Very few of my blitz opponents merit a rematch. If one of us crushes the other easily, there's little reason for playing more. If the game exhibited anything nefarious (lag, evidence of unfair play, rude comments, ...) a rematch would be absurd.
I actually see rematch requests after an opponent let the clock run out in a lost position. Blocking is a more rational response to such behavior than accepting a rematch.
it means i beat you 5-0 and i dont feel like beating you anymore.
" Q & A with Coach Heisman!"
Opening repertoire 4 patzers Best ones to get playable positions and quick wins!
by SmyslovFan a few minutes ago
Ponziani: Impractical in non-computer Correspondence Chess?
by SocialPanda a few minutes ago
A few statistics from the USCF database
by MrEdCollins 10 minutes ago
beating the grunfeld defense
by kiwi 12 minutes ago
7/25/2014 - Sahovic - Karolyi 1986
by Marianjeborec 15 minutes ago
Stuff Non-Chess Players Say
by December_TwentyNine 16 minutes ago
Does anyone play rated bullet here?
by neznaika2012 16 minutes ago
Ashley's Million-dollar chess tourney - but bring your own clocks
by vizio23 24 minutes ago
Steinitz vs Morphy
by yureesystem 26 minutes ago
trompovsky for black
by MetalRatel 32 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2014 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!