To betray too early means 3rd place in 95% of cases

https://www.chess.com/4-player-chess?g=7439064 I WON attacking my opposite in the 4 player stage

Cuber, ONCE AGAIN, it's 1/1, bullet. Not really the same. I was speaking about normal games (1/15 for instance). In bullet (that my side I play A LOT) indeed it does happen, and it's by no means comparable. 

I do not think there are a lot of examples of 1/15 FFA games with players beyond 2200 where a player would kill his opp in the FIRST stage and would win.

(The only exception to this is when your opp is NECESSARILY checkmated next move, and YOU can do really NOTHING to save him, but can at least take +20 yourself and prevent thus the sides from mating; that happened to me some times both as checkmater and checkmated, and it's pretty normal).

OK ALL RIGHT CALM DOWN

I think it's a general law: you betray in the 1st stage FFA, you are 3rd in the vast majority of cases, at least when the other 2 players play logically and correctly.

https://www.chess.com/4-player-chess?g=7680736

https://www.chess.com/4-player-chess?g=8063115

ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF THE CONSEQUENCES OF BETRAYING TOO EARLY

https://www.chess.com/4-player-chess?g=7959340-27 THE ONLY CASE WHERE YOU SHOULD BE MATING YOUR OPPOSITE WHERE YOU CAN DO ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO SAVE HIM

yes, absolutely!

Also if you've already saved him numerous times, and to continue can't give you but 4th place (because you lose material), whereas he clearly can't be saved anymore, regardless. In this case too, to kill him still makes sense, as you avoid being 4th. 

And another one. Even 2301 players sometimes do that! And finish 3rd.

https://www.chess.com/4-player-chess?g=8128693

AND this: I was teaming with an opp who is always 'I am not gonna show usernames' and I got 2nd all the time when I always mated the flank.

green would pin ur queen and save blue by sac q

in both moves

And another impressive demonstration. It's crazy how seldom are games where one betrays the opposite in the 1st stage and doesn't finish 3rd afterwards.

https://www.chess.com/4-player-chess?g=8691291

Indipendenza, with the first 10 moves you played I would betray you too, and I probably wouldnt get third in 95% of cases, probably closer to 20% or better (20% is my very conservative guess).

If you dont show yourself to be a good opposite there is no reason to expect the same of others

You're free to play however you want, and me too. I do not think to be a very bad opposite, numerous times I had to sacrifice several pieces, sometimes event 3 times up to queen, in order to save the opp from a certain mate. So no, I do not really accept the argument. (Yes I am fully aware that some players consider that you have to play some "inevitable moves" (it's a quotation from Tom who said that on another thread) that are taken from their Teams mode practice, but personally I find this trend utterly abusive in FFA as it deprives us from more inventive and beautiful games, but that's my personal opinion of course).

Look if you would ask most strong ffa players (2500+), they would say you play like a bad opposite. Dont get queen out (or prepare to), dont play teams openings, push pawn in the opening (which is a terrible strategy even in not teams ffa/solo).

From MY perspective to refuse to play blitzkrieg teams openings with Q out does not mean necessarily being a bad opp. For me a bad opp is the one who doesn't help when needed badly or even attacks you. 

As for pushing pawns: I almost never do it in fact in normal games, only in bullet as I realised that it works much better/more often than people think. As for normal games, I seldom do that.

Whatever, this thread is not about my style of play, who cares. It's about the stupidity of attacking in front in the 1st stage FFA.

https://www.chess.com/4-player-chess?g=8700398

10000th example. Green is passive, doesn't help when needed, and eventually kills his opp (who of course finishes 4th) and it means 3rd place for him. General law.