^ Click here to remove ads! ^

Taking too long, et. al.

Jump to forum:
« Previous | 1 2 3 | Next » | Last Post
23rd May 2008, 08:16pm
#1
by Niven42
West Lafayette, Indiana United States
Member Since: Feb 2008
Member Points: 270

There needs to be a way to end a tournament that has gone on for too long.  And I understand that the time-per-move system should take care of this, but that is not the problem.  People are exploiting the system, going on vacation when they're close to losing, or waiting until the last minute to make a move, hoping their opponents will get frustrated and quit.  Tournaments are timed in real life, couldn't there be a way to set a limit on the duration of one here?  I'm talking about a set ending point, where all games in progress at that point are draws.

24th May 2008, 05:34am
#2
by DimKnight
Connecticut United States
Member Since: Mar 2008
Member Points: 136

In a recent issue of Chess Life, the magazine of the US Chess Federation, they announced the results of two recently completed "Golden Knights" correspondence chess tournaments. Specifically, the 1997 and the 1999 tournaments.

Correspondence chess takes a long time. This is a strange concept in fast-paced, fast-changing internet-land, where ten or twelve years can seem like centuries (does anybody remember Gopher?). No doubt some people are looking to exploit loopholes; but the fact remains that a hard-fought, hundred-move game at a 3-day time limit could take nearly two years to complete.


24th May 2008, 05:44am
#3
by Baseballfan
Durham, North Carolina United States
Member Since: Feb 2008
Member Points: 825
DimKnight wrote:

In a recent issue of Chess Life, the magazine of the US Chess Federation, they announced the results of two recently completed "Golden Knights" correspondence chess tournaments. Specifically, the 1997 and the 1999 tournaments.

Correspondence chess takes a long time. This is a strange concept in fast-paced, fast-changing internet-land, where ten or twelve years can seem like centuries (does anybody remember Gopher?). No doubt some people are looking to exploit loopholes; but the fact remains that a hard-fought, hundred-move game at a 3-day time limit could take nearly two years to complete.


 (Applause) Thanks DimKnight, I couldn't have said it better myself.


24th May 2008, 05:56am
#4
by silentfilmstar13
Medford, OR United States
Member Since: Sep 2007
Member Points: 2071
Well said, DimKnight!  Now we just need to copy and paste that reply into the 3 billion or so threads that focus on this topic.
24th May 2008, 05:58am
#5
by Loomis
Tallahassee, FL United States
Member Since: Oct 2007
Member Points: 2139

"Tournaments are timed in real life, couldn't there be a way to set a limit on the duration of one here?  I'm talking about a set ending point, where all games in progress at that point are draws."

Wouldn't this be giving in to the stallers? People who stall when they are losing would get just what they wanted. They would draw instead of lose. 


24th May 2008, 10:34am
#6
by Niven42
West Lafayette, Indiana United States
Member Since: Feb 2008
Member Points: 270
Loomis wrote: Wouldn't this be giving in to the stallers? People who stall when they are losing would get just what they wanted. They would draw instead of lose. 

No, because the stalling issue is handled by time-per-move.  If you can't defeat your opponent before time runs out, then the draw is in order.  For more info, check out the way trading card game (like Magic, Yu-Gi-Oh, etc.) tournaments are handled - since most of the players there are very young, the rules are somewhat more vulgar and easier to catalyze.  And each phase of time control (stalling, match length, tournament length) is clearly addressed.

 

My biggest complaint is on tournament length, which I feel the current Chess.com rules don't address how to handle.


24th May 2008, 11:56am
#7
by Loomis
Tallahassee, FL United States
Member Since: Oct 2007
Member Points: 2139

Niven, your complaint is "People are exploiting the system, going on vacation when they're close to losing, or waiting until the last minute to make a move, hoping their opponents will get frustrated and quit."

 

If you make a hard deadline that a game becomes a draw on a certain date, then all you have done is give people a reason to stall. You are making the "exploiting the system" even more worthwhile. Not only can a defeat be delayed, it can be made into a draw. 

 

"If you can't defeat your opponent before time runs out, then the draw is in order."

Often times an easily winning position requires another 20-30 moves to grind out to checkmate if the opponent is stubborn enough. If, as you say, the losing side is taking the maximum time and going on vacation, how is it the winners fault the game is not concluded by the deadline? 


24th May 2008, 11:59am
#8
by xqsme
Lanarkshire Scotland
Member Since: Nov 2007
Member Points: 142
Why not have a reasonable time limit for all play to be completed--unfinished games would be awarded to the player who made last move.By that ruling,   the players who stall the games wouldbe suitably penalised.
24th May 2008, 12:12pm
#9
by Loomis
Tallahassee, FL United States
Member Since: Oct 2007
Member Points: 2139
So you're suggesting that instead of playing chess we play hot potato?
24th May 2008, 12:15pm
#10
by Niven42
West Lafayette, Indiana United States
Member Since: Feb 2008
Member Points: 270
xqsme wrote: Why not have a reasonable time limit for all play to be completed--unfinished games would be awarded to the player who made last move.By that ruling,   the players who stall the games wouldbe suitably penalised.

Everyone's had valuable comments and I thank you for your insight.  I guess what would make me happy (a tournament judge) is a function that's not entirely feasable for the Chess.com staff.  But yes, a "reasonable time limit", after which games in progress are considered draws, would suffice.  Yes, there would be some players who would exploit this, but not at all like it is exploited currently by players who are clearly avoiding loss.


24th May 2008, 12:16pm
#11
by TheGrobe
Calgary Canada
Member Since: Nov 2007
Member Points: 432

If you can't defeat your opponent before time runs out, then the draw is in order.


 This is still ripe for manipulation -- your opponent has too much control over the duration of the game because half of the moves are his.  I can see a situation arising where you are in a winning position, but also bearing down on this time limit, and your opponent just works to strech his moves out to the maximum allowed in the hopes of landing a draw.  This would be particularly easy to do if the imbalance were evident very early in the game.

Perhaps what you're looking for is a maximum aggregate time each opponent is allowed per game in addition to the time-per-move.  If you run this clock down, you lose, much as you would for a time-out on a single move.  This would ensure that your opponent's pace has no bearing on your aggregate time nor would it result in an outcome that is less favourable for the non-offending player.


24th May 2008, 12:26pm
#12
by slowhand
Mississippi Pinebelt United States
Member Since: Aug 2007
Member Points: 129
   One possible solution to your frustration may be to only enter a tourney that vacation time wasn't allowed and move times were 1 per day.  If there isn't a tourney set up this way then perhaps take it upon yourself to do so... kind of a "If you are going to play with me you are going to have to play by my rules" thing.
24th May 2008, 12:26pm
#13
by PerfectGent
Scotland
Member Since: Feb 2008
Member Points: 658

the only tournament i can see you involved in started on the 6th may just 18 days ago. it is a 3 day /move tourney. now at normal calculations this (allowing for an average 30 move game) could take 180 days ie 6 months to complete. And even with faster play I can not see ending in less than 3/4 months. You have not been on site that long so how can you possibly be complaining about slow play??

You are in a multi round tourney and some of the other groups are quite understanderbly at a less advanced stage than yours.  So why the rush to get yours over with. even if your group completes you are locked into your 1 tournament until it finishes.


24th May 2008, 12:31pm
#14
by Niven42
West Lafayette, Indiana United States
Member Since: Feb 2008
Member Points: 270
PerfectGent wrote:

the only tournament i can see you involved in started on the 6th may just 18 days ago. it is a 3 day /move tourney. now at normal calculations this (allowing for an average 30 move game) could take 180 days ie 6 months to complete. And even with faster play I can not see ending in less than 3/4 months. You have not been on site that long so how can you possibly be complaining about slow play??

You are in a multi round tourney and some of the other groups are quite understanderbly at a less advanced stage than yours.  So why the rush to get yours over with. even if your group completes you are locked into your 1 tournament until it finishes.


I'm in 2 tourneys.  The Chess.com one doesn't count towards your limit.  My "Czech Open" tournament is also one where someone has been manipulating time.  Perhaps I'm just unfortunate to have been paired with the only 2 "bozo's" on this site.

TheGrobe wrote: ...what you're looking for is a maximum aggregate time each opponent is allowed per game in addition to the time-per-move.  If you run this clock down, you lose, much as you would for a time-out on a single move.  This would ensure that your opponent's pace has no bearing on your aggregate time nor would it result in an outcome that is less favourable for the non-offending player.


Exactly.  But more to the point, it would take a Judge to determine if someone was holding up the entire tournament, which is something that we'd only get in a perfect world.

 

I realize that some tournaments, especially correspondance, could take a while to complete.  My situation is one where someone is deliberately holding it up - which ruins it for the other players that aren't Chess.com members.  And yes, I will totally not allow this in my tournaments.


24th May 2008, 01:26pm
#15
by Baseballfan
Durham, North Carolina United States
Member Since: Feb 2008
Member Points: 825
Niven42 wrote: 

I realize that some tournaments, especially correspondance, could take a while to complete.  My situation is one where someone is deliberately holding it up - which ruins it for the other players that aren't Chess.com members.  And yes, I will totally not allow this in my tournaments.


 If you truly think that someone is deliberatly holding up an entire tournament, to the detriment of the rest of the players, the best way to handle that is to inform the chess.com staff. Use the "Report Abuse" link that is at the bottom of every page on this site, and they will respond to you as soon as they can.


24th May 2008, 01:41pm
#16
by Niven42
West Lafayette, Indiana United States
Member Since: Feb 2008
Member Points: 270
Baseballfan wrote:

 If you truly think that someone is deliberatly holding up an entire tournament, to the detriment of the rest of the players, the best way to handle that is to inform the chess.com staff. Use the "Report Abuse" link that is at the bottom of every page on this site, and they will respond to you as soon as they can.

Thanks for your advice.  I've already filed a complaint, but the person isn't necessarily "absuing", since they are still entitled to the described behavior by the rules.

By the way, this guy has over 70 games in progress, many of which he's winning due to time.  My gut feeling is that he's milking the system, but there's nothing against it - we could all do the very same thing if it didn't violate all common sense and decency.


24th May 2008, 01:54pm
#17
by lecycliste
Geneva Switzerland
Member Since: Feb 2008
Member Points: 132
Time heals every issue here. Every issue. Relax.
No-one can enhance their record by playing slow (not long term)
24th May 2008, 01:59pm
#18
by Skeptikill
Ireland Ireland
Member Since: Feb 2008
Member Points: 63

tbh i believe that there is nothing you can do about this problem you feel is there.

im currently playing the last game of a tournement which ive been playing for a long time. I use 2 days usually to make moves.i cant get to come on the site everyday and when i do i have several games playing at a time and i like to think about my moves carefully.some games are easy to make moves in as its easy to know one of the best moves to make while others i spend a few visits to the site looking at them.\i think that this draw idea would not work at all and people would just get more annoyed at it and then have more discussions about it in other forums. Its just one of the downfalls of correspondance chess.

 But surely it doesnt take up much of your time as you only look at it when its your turn and when its not you have plenty of time to play other games. And if its because you can only play one tournement at a time side affect yes this is annoying but its supposed to encourage you to pay to play on this site. No such thing as a free dinner. Personally i think this is by far the most superior site ive played chess on, especially for free where i have everything. 


24th May 2008, 02:06pm
#19
by Niven42
West Lafayette, Indiana United States
Member Since: Feb 2008
Member Points: 270
All good points - thanks for your views!  Any thoughts about the need for a Judge in special cases?
24th May 2008, 02:59pm
#20
by Skeptikill
Ireland Ireland
Member Since: Feb 2008
Member Points: 63
Personally i cant see this as a good idea or being implemented. A game should be played until finished or resignation. If you find not being able to play in 2 tournements simultanoeusly then you should just pay. Thats the point of these constrictions. The site would like you to pay. Im gona pay after the summer for def.30$ is sweet price
« Previous | 1 2 3 | Next » | Last Post

Add your comment:

Join Chess.com for free to add your comment! Already a member? Then login now to comment.