Chess.com Proposal for Fixing Game Disconnects/Adjourned Games

hrmm..... soaking it all in.... not sure.... thinking.... :)

FYI - we WILL give an option. not allowing games to adjourn would be a mistake and we would then have a TON of people asking "what do i do if i want to finish my game with my friend later" etc on disconnect.

I think he meant that adjournment or the 90 seconds was like pausing. I'd agree in both instances and I don't support changes that interfere with the set time control and can delay and the result past the agreed limit (unless maybe the remaining player chooses to). They're LIVE game after all.

Sure, but just like adding takebacks, this could create a more negative atmosphere since now the loser often starts blaming the opponent for not adjourning or giving a mouse slip takeback. Moreover, even players who don't want to adjourn or give takebacks may feel obligated to or pressured to and so will concede to feel like they took the high road. Those that don't will sometimes be harassed later. Still, this is a minor issue to me and it may be a net positive in the end. The probelms with it might be much like the problems for taxi drivers when almost everyone has a car. It's just the price of progress. This would also free those who don't like waiting at all and would rather continue later.

I agree with exigentsky on this issue, but I can see how it can also get annoying to have to wait as I have been subject to someone letting their time expire when I was winning. Couldn't you combine the two? Let the person come back in their allotted time, but after 90 sec. let the person still connected decide to abort or adjourn? No choice to win, if you have a winning position you have to wait for the person's time to expire, since you already expected to play more than twice that time. If you don't feel like waiting you can adjourn and then normal adjourn rules take effect or you can abort the game and nobody wins. I think this is probably the most "fair", and would be best for quick games since in a 60 sec. game a player might have to wait an additional 90 sec. for someone to return.

Now, I actually favor a compromise to my initial idea. The remaining player will wait until his opponent's time has expired or ten minutes have elapsed to claim a win (there will be a choice to adjourn after a disconnect, but not to abort). Thus, even in hour long games, ten minutes will be the most the remaining player will have to wait. After all, this is enough time to restart the router, reboot, reconnect or deal with other minor problems. It is clear the player is not coming back after ten minutes. Of course, the remaining player may also choose to adjourn rather than wait. Anyway, given that most games on Live Chess are less than ten minutes, it's unlikely that this clause will make much of a difference. It's just an extra layer of protection.

BTW: We should rememeber that no one really waits. If my opponent disconnected, I'd turn up my volume and simply visit other websites and do other things. I might even enable multiple games in Live Chess and play someone else. It's not like I have to stare at the game window without flinching.

I hadn't read that far, but the compromise seems fair. 10 min. is long enough, and I did feel that long games would be torture. Fair, compromise... excellent. Good!

why not have it be 10 minutes or the remaining time in the game, whichever is lower? :)

Erik, that's exactly my proposal (the second version with the compromise, after I thought things through more). Is that your mysterious way of agreeing?

Really good!

I like this new idea.

10 minutes or the remaining time in the game, whichever is lower sounds GREAT.

I play mainly 15+5 to 60+5, to simulate OTB play. This scheme also works fine for me, assuming disconnects where chess.com is at fault are minimal.

curiously, why 10 minutes and not 5?

:)

10 is such a nice number and I have immense fondness for it! It's really so we don't get back into the debates where I felt that chess.com would be stealing my time. If it's too little, there is a good chance that I might reconnect and find it unfair that I already have a loss when I still would have had much time left. 10 minutes is enough leeway but not too much so as to really annoy the remainng player. Whether the time control is 30 minutes or 90, 10 minutes will always seem relatively reasonable to restart the router, reboot etc. It fits in smoothly. If someone can't reconnect in 10 minutes it's clear he won't be continuing the game. I would strongly prefer 10 minutes.

On the other hand, it is also unlikely that it will reach this stage since most games are shorter than ten minutes and most disconnections don't happen right when the game starts anyway.

10 minutes not enough time to annoy the remaining player?  Nobody is going to sit in front of their computer for 10 min. waiting for another player who might come back.

I can disconnect at home, drive to mcdonalds, grab a double cheeseburger, wash it down with a soda, and be back home in time to reconnect in 10 minutes.

yeah... i'm still going back and forth in my mind between "90 seconds" and "remaining time w/ max of 5/10 minutes".  i wish we had more voices in here...

Nor would you have to just sit and stare at the game window. Obviously you can do whatever you like on the computer (even start another game) and can work around the room or just adjourn it. Alternatively, you can play time controls less than ten minutes. Ten minutes isn't an eternity. It's barely enough for me to get to my next class.

If the player that was disconnected has more than ten minutes left and a win was claimed by the remaining player, we've already taken time that rightfully belonged to the disconnected player as per the agreed upon time control. It is only in the interest of reducing frustration and due to these special circumstances that such an exception is made. Thus, it must be clearly comfortable and sufficient time with the benefit of the doubt. Ten minutes should be the minimum.

BTW: Don't forget that your opponent would have no advantage in wasting his time instead of reconnecting. After all, it means less time for him to think.

You have many ways to gather opinions--from surveys, to this thread, to the live chess room, to chess.com messages. I would be careful to ask the question in as simple terms as possible. Not everyone reads long threads or messages. :)

What should happen when a player disconnects from a Live Chess game?

  A. The clocks don't stop; they lose if they don't return within 5-10 minutes.

  B. The clocks stop; they lose if they don't return within 90 seconds.

I had written a bit about the phrasing and how "they" might affect the survey results (reason why surverys have multiple questions that mean the same thing but are phrased differently)...  forget it. That's too many details and too much thought for somethings so simple.