Chess.com Needs Your Input - Live Chess Games Adjourned?!

phindex

Ilike the idea of a combination of the above ideas.

1. The first opportunity for both players online the game should be resumed.  The person who disconnected should not have the option to resume (should be automatic for this side.)

2. If a player has frequent disconnects, there should be some penalty.

3. There should be an option for paying members not to play players who have disconnect protection off.  (which implies there should be a 'disconnect protection option').  If both players have chosen the disconnect option then the game will automatically be ended if someone drops.

--- Frank Johnson/shootfilm.net ---

I hate the idea of adjournment. Gives someone a chance to cheat. If they want three more days play correspondence.

I am not in support of the adjournment option.

I think there should be a stat page showing the number of games a player loses through a disconnection. Players are then able to decide whether to accept or reject a challenge from a player with a high disconnection ratio!

First, I suggest chess.com not worry about exceptional cases such as a person's computer or network dying. If that happens, the person will EXPECT to have losses, and a chess game loss would be the least of the losses.

The annoying situation for a Live Chess player is to be disconnected in a won or even position (assessed while considering the clock and time limits), and score a loss solely because of the disconnect.

I think that situation should be addressed, while trying to continue to punish people who deliberately disconnect.

If someone is legitimately disconnected, and they have an hour to reconnect and resume, I think that would cover the vast majority of the cases they might complain about.

I think that if they come back to Live Chess, and their opponent is online, they should be given a choice between waiting for their opponent to become available to resume, or resigning and be able to play other Live Chess games. Their opponent would be able to finish their current game, but not be able to play any more Live Chess games until they either finish their adjourned game, or resigned.

In other words, the highest priority for each player in Live Chess should be to resume their adjourned game.

I think it is unfair to effectively have a Grandmaster (program) adjudicate games between two low-rated players (i.e., 99% of chess.com players). Adjudication should be assessed according to the ratings of the players. That gets so complicated that I advocate no adjudications at all.

Just have a mechanism that allows legitimate players to resume as soon as they reconnect.

I agree completely with DavidForthoffer's ideas and I hope something like this can be implemented...

I do not think games should be mark win or lose base on the positional or material advantages of any particular player. (unless the position is win for sure) Because once, I've lost queen early in game and ended up winning. I think we shouldn't even implement this adjourned feature at all. After all, this is live chess. If people wan to delay games, they should play CC chess instead. the point of live chess is for players to think in real time. this adjourned feature ruin that. 

As I said erik, the best thing u can do about the disconnect is

1. fix the server

2. get more bandwidth

3. fix the codes

4. concentrate on all the above

Wow, excelguru, that is a fantastic flow chart. I guess I won't be submitting cellphone photographs of my notes written on cocktail napkins. I've gotta get a better system. Seriously, well done mt friend, well done!

excelguru, kudos for your work on the flow / decision chart. It's well-presented, logical, and coveys most of the ideas discussed in this thread (except 'no adjournments').

Let's not get too brisk with the reconnection time control, please. Often when I am disconnected from Chess.com, I find the quickest way to reconnect is to reboot my machine. Let's allow at least (reboot + reconnection) time, say 10 minutes.

I think the only valid purpose for non-agreed adjournment is to avoid losses for no-fault disconnects. For this reason, the resume time should be very short - less than an hour. That's ample time for someone to reconnect if the server is working. If the disconnect is mutual (server-side default), then the game should be a draw. If the person never disconnects, there shouldn't be an adjudication- the disconnecting player should default the game. Otherwise it creates a perverse incentive: if I'm up in a game, but I am uncertain of victory, I can intentionally disconnect, and secure an adjudicated victory by staying off the network for a week. Or, I could get a draw against a much stronger player by the same tactic. This breaks the entire system and must be undone.

I'm in favor of this simple policy:

disconnect == loss

I get disconnected a couple of times a month.  So I lose some points ... big deal, I'll earn them back.  This policy will also keep the number of disconnections to a minimum.

I honestly believe 5 minutes is enough ... if you disconnect, your clock should keep running and you have to come back and rejoin the game within 5 minutes or be auto-resigned.

That way the people with bad internet connections aren't getting an advantage in the way of extra time to analyze.

Please see post #80.

I just played a game and went a pawn up on the 25th move... the guy disconnected immediately...  I can convert that position to a win 90% of the time.

My guess is we'll see an epidemic of people going a pawn down or getting into unpromising positions and then disconnecting...

Also, if they genuinely want to, they can research the position the game was adjourned at and prepare for the restart...  I think the entire thing is asking for trouble.

i believe that using the "poker" sites way of dealing with a DC is the way forward in this. example in poker- im next to act in a game but my opponent DC's the timer goes red and adds around 90sec to the time. once he connects again the timer resumes at the time he DC'ed on. if he didnt return in the 90sec he'd be sat out.

in live chess it could work the same but with an added clock of 3-5 min.if opponent didnt re connect and resume the game in that time you would forfeit the game. As it says its "live" chess, you would want to re connect as you are playing live and could be winning. i think 5 min is enough in any game to re connect. my pc is terrible but i could re start my pc connect to internet and resume game in 5 min no problem. maybe more time period if your a premium member as your more likely to use the live format more than someone for free and play more games.

If a game is adjourned, and the person who adjourns the game comes back online and his opponent is also, the person who adjourned the game should have to resume the game w/ the other player before starting a new game. In the event the other player is in another game, then, there should be an option to let that player know they are online and would like to resume the game. At that point, if the other player agrees to resume, the player who adjourned must wait. If not, then it will be a game of chess tag. Understandably, aplayer can be disconnected suddenly, due to their server, but in most cases when it is a question of a legitimate disconnect, they are able to come RIGHT BACK ON. If after given the option to resume, the other player chooses not to, well, then the game should just be aborted. As far as the time frame to do this, I would say 3 days. If after 3 days, neither player is online together, the game is then adjudicated.

I too believe that this is the best way but slightly different. There should be a "time bank" that you are allotted for ever x number of games. If you disconnect the time bank takes into effect and your clock is not effected. However if your time bank runs out, I don't think that you should be automatically resigned. I believe that then the clock should run down.

Now this doesn't take into account the possibility of a server error when both people are disconnected. This is the only time that I think that the possibility of adjudicating a game seems plausible.

I don't like adjournments.  Maintaining your internet connection is just part of the deal when you play games online in real time with other people.  Half the time it feels like they do it on purpose as well, which is frustrating.

Okay here's how it should work ... I've seen it all in practice now and I've researched what some other sites do.

If you disconnect, your clock keeps running (just as if you took a bathroom break in a real tournament) ... either you lose on time (your opponent can claim a win after x number of minutes on most sites) or you come back and finish the game right then and there ... otherwise this simply doesn't work...

Excellent idea, terrible execution ... I'm dissapointed.