Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

Letting time run out vs resigning


  • 5 months ago · Quote · #101

    Ubik42

    I cannot understand the mentality. Also, I cannot understand the mentality of the people who defend this behaviour, except of course that all of the defenders are in the habit of the same poor sportsmanship qualities.

  • 5 months ago · Quote · #102

    whmeh0

    It seems to me that there must be some server modification that could help ameliorate this problem. I have an idea:

    If a player makes no moves for a significant period of time, then there could be a popup that asks if he's still playing/thinking. If he doesn't click "yes" within a reasonable amount of time, then he forfeits the game automatically. There could be a threshold for amount of material disadvantage; say, the server only asks inactive players who are down 3 points of material or more.

    The appropriate period of idle time could be a little tricky to nail down. A set period of time might work, but the idle time could be scaled (perhaps non-linearly) based on how much time the player had on the clock when their turn started. If a player clicks "yes" to indicate that he is indeed still playing, but never makes a move, that player would obviously be flagged by the server.

    Thoughts?

  • 5 months ago · Quote · #103

    Boogalicious

    Good idea! --- unless the popup distracts the player who is thinking resulting in them having to recalculate from scratch..

  • 5 months ago · Quote · #104

    siiva

    What I do is open a second browser window, while keeping an eye on the game (in case the guy makes a move with a few seconds left), and I watch a MatoJelic video on youtube! They are only about 5 minutes each and it passes the time and I learn about chess at the same time. Cheers

  • 5 months ago · Quote · #105

    RonaldJosephCote

                 Its not a server problem, its a behavior issue. Time must be allowed to run down even if its 1 second left.  People who can't see a no-win scanario have more problems in life than chess. 

  • 5 months ago · Quote · #106

    pt22064

    melvinbluestone wrote:
    beardogjones wrote:

    If the person is in a losing position, how do we know they are skilled enough

    to know that they are ina losing position?


     Check and double-check! to this ridiculous argument. The point is this: When I play a ten minute game, for example, I do so with the understanding that my opponent has ten minutes to make his moves. He may get mated or resign, and in that case use less than ten minutes. Or he may use the entire ten minutes. I know this going in. He may make 30 moves in ten minutes, or he may make 15, or 5 or 3. He may have spent the last month studying the Morphy Defense in the Lopez and I hit 'em with 3...g6!? So he may take a long time on his fourth move, or any move. I enter into a TEN MINUTE game with the understanding my opponent has TEN minutes to make his moves. How he alots his time, or how many moves he makes in that time period, is his business. He's got ten minutes. If he has to take a phone call, or see his wife off to work during the game, that's his business. If he gets fed up, and walks away, he has that right. When his clock runs out, I get the win. What's the problem? That's the game. Why is chess.com trying to "devine" the other player's state of mind and pass a judgement on it? So my opponent gets disgusted and abandons the game. I get the win. If you don't like waiting for your opponent, whatever he's doing, don't play!

    I agree with a portion of your post. If someone has to answer the doorbell or take care of something else, then that is certainly allowable.  However, if he is really leaving because he realizes that his position is hopeless, he should resign.  That is the polite and ethical thing to do.  I think it is very difficult to discern between the two situations without interrogating the player, as it really is a matter of intent.  However, if the player consistently times out in lost positions without ever resiging,that at least provides circumstantial evidence of bad intent.
  • 5 months ago · Quote · #107

    Estrinian

    InstantChess does it better.

  • 5 months ago · Quote · #108

    whmeh0

    RonaldJosephCote wrote:

                 Its not a server problem, its a behavior issue. Time must be allowed to run down even if its 1 second left.  People who can't see a no-win scanario have more problems in life than chess. 

    Did anyone ever say anywhere that it's a server problem? I suggested a server modification that could help ameliorate the behavior issue, but never said it's a server problem. KissTongue Out As for "time must be allowed to run down even if its [sic] 1 second left"-- if there were only one second left in a game, this problem doesn't exist there. The problem is when there is a lot of time left; I think you misunderstand the subject of this thread. And "time MUST be allowed to run down?" That's your opinion. Sure, thats the rule for OTB games where there's money and USCF ratings on the line, but it's poor sportsmanship to abandon a game in a clearly lost position.

    If chess.com wishes to foster a friendly, respectful community where people enjoy playing chess, it seems that this is the sort of thing the admins would wish to combat.


Back to Top

Post your reply: