players very very far from fairplay - Chess Forums - Page 2

Rsava

Nov 13, 2013

0

#21

fouhad42 wrote:

in some cases it can be true as you explain. but I'm sure in some others cases, those players are simply afraid of playing a rematch because they know that their win is only a question of luck and coincidence not a question of strengh, otherwise they would accept the rematch.

Sound like someone who is frustrated that they are not better.

Someone beat you. Deal with. Or don't.

Just show respect for your fellow players who choose not to rematch.

Somebodysson

Nov 13, 2013

0

#22

Rsava wrote:

Ok, tell me, fouhad42 - I live in America, eastern time zone (GMT -5). I am currently at work. I get 1 hour for lunch.

I eat my lunch and have 1/2 hour left on my lunch break. So I jump on chess.com for a quick game, a 10min one. If all time is used it is 20 minutes. I finish the game and now have 10 minutes left on my lunch break, not enough time for a rematch. I then come over to the forums for a quick read and find some guy from another time zone berating players who won't rematch.

Talk about a lack of respect. You sir, have no respect for other players.

well said Rsava. Teach. Not having time for immediate rematch is hardly 'unfair'. craziness.

fouhad42

Nov 13, 2013

0

#23

Robkin a écrit :

not giving a rematch, has nothing to do with fairplay.

I never give a rematch and I never ask for one..as I find bullet rather exhausting and always take a break of some min. before playing the next. I am every day here online, so I will meet any of my opponents dozens of times again..

your approach of fairplay is either antique or nonsense

everyone is free to think what he wants. I'm exposing my point of view, but what I have discovered through this discussion is that people here can't accept a different point of view: what I'm trying to say is that accepting a rematch is a question of RESPECT TO THE OPPONENT. furthermore, by declining a rematch it shows that the player is afraid of playing again because he won the game by luck or coincidence. If he was sure of his strengh, he would obviously accept the rematch.

Useless_Eustace

Nov 13, 2013

0

#24

i agree witya - buthen its gonna be that way.

yule git usterer.

Sred

Nov 13, 2013

0

#25

fouhad42 wrote:

Rsava a écrit :

fouhad42 wrote:

hi

I want to expose ... they don't understand what is the meaning of fairplay.

Definition of "fair play" - Conformity to established rules.

Can you point to which established rule in the game of chess says that someon must offer you/accept a rematch? Just wondering because I have read the entire USCF rule book as well as the entire FIDE rule book and I do not remember that rule being in either set of established set of rules.

(I cannot find the definition of "fairplay", perhaps that is not really a word?)

Perhaps it is you who does not undestand the meaning of "fair play".

"fairplay" is not only a question of rules. maybe accepting or declining a rematch is not established as a rule of fairplay but it has a real connection with it because it's a question of respect to your opponent: when you play against a player , you have to show respect not only during the game but also after ( for example accepting a rematch; I'm not talking here about five or ten rematches but only one rematch) . it's a question of respect towards the opponent that's all

You seem to have an interesting notion of respect. Would you mind sharing your definition of the term "respect" with us?

It never even remotely occurred to me that declining a rematch would be disrespectful!

Rsava

Nov 13, 2013

0

#26

fouhad42 wrote:

Robkin a écrit :

not giving a rematch, has nothing to do with fairplay.

I never give a rematch and I never ask for one..as I find bullet rather exhausting and always take a break of some min. before playing the next. I am every day here online, so I will meet any of my opponents dozens of times again..

your approach of fairplay is either antique or nonsense

everyone is free to think what he wants. I'm exposing my point of view, but what I have discovered through this discussion is that people here can't accept a different point of view: what I'm trying to say is that accepting a rematch is a question of RESPECT TO THE OPPONENT. furthermore, by declining a rematch it shows that the player is afraid of playing again because he won the game by luck or coincidence. If he was sure of his strengh, he would obviously accept the rematch.

The one who cannot accept a different point of view is you. You need to RESPECT your fellow chessplayers who choose not to rematch. There are many, many reasons for this, not just that they are "afraid" of you. I have never played you. I am not "afraid" of playing you and would not be "afraid" of playing a rematch with you. If circumstances allow it, I would be happy to.

But for you come in and whine how people have no respect (when it is YOU who has no respect) is laughable.

fouhad42

Nov 13, 2013

0

#27

Rsava a écrit :

Ok, tell me, fouhad42 - I live in America, eastern time zone (GMT -5). I am currently at work. I get 1 hour for lunch.

I eat my lunch and have 1/2 hour left on my lunch break. So I jump on chess.com for a quick game, a 10min one. If all time is used it is 20 minutes. I finish the game and now have 10 minutes left on my lunch break, not enough time for a rematch. I then come over to the forums for a quick read and find some guy from another time zone berating players who won't rematch.

Talk about a lack of respect. You sir, have no respect for other players.

ok. accordingly to your idea, if really someone hasn't enough time to play , there's a simple solution: in the chat area you can write a little sentence saying for example "I'm sorry I can't accept rematch" it will not take from you more than 10 seconds, then you can disconnect. but I have noticed here that some people in their discussions are a little bit intolerant, they can't open their minds to discuss objectively the facts. Sincerely, I'm disappointed.

Rsava

Nov 13, 2013

0

#28

You are correct, they could do that.

But how is not doing that disrespectful? Calling you names is disrespectful. Calling your mother names is disrespectful. Making fun of you is disrespectful.

Disagreeing with you? Not disrespectful at all.

Again, you are the one who is intolerant, you want everyone to conform to your way of doing things.

Omnifigment

Nov 13, 2013

0

#29

fouhad42 wrote:

everyone is free to think what he wants. I'm exposing my point of view, but what I have discovered through this discussion is that people here can't accept a different point of view: what I'm trying to say is that accepting a rematch is a question of RESPECT TO THE OPPONENT. furthermore, by declining a rematch it shows that the player is afraid of playing again because he won the game by luck or coincidence. If he was sure of his strengh, he would obviously accept the rematch.

Okay, look, "everyone is free to think what he wants," sure, but we are not obligated to agree with it. You aren't a king and we aren't your subjects. You created a thread on your thoughts; certainly you expect replies on that thought. If you don't wan replies, you could have not post at all in the first place.

And we're saying that people have real-life responsibilities, as well as physical and mental limits, too.

Blitz and bullet games are fast, but a normal chess game last about 30 minutes. Not all of us have all the time in the world to play this for hours, not to mention that some of us prefer 5 or 10 minutes break between games to avoid mental fatigue.

Chess is generally view as a quiet game. It isn't strange that people don't like to talk in a game; this is even more prevalent online. So don't be surprise when we decline without saying anything either (perhaps only a "good game" note).

Fair play, in chess, generally mean winning with our own ability, without third-party assistance (such as another person or a chess engine). It has nothing to do with accepting or refusing a rematch.

On this note, I'm thinking that you're mistaking fair play with sportmanship. Now, sportmanship encompasses much larger area (and happen to include fair play in it, too), but also vary slightly from person to person. It seems to fits more with your original post.

hakim2005

Nov 13, 2013

0

#30

lwa9t s3iba awlidi

ktumbleweed

Nov 13, 2013

0

#31

If I get in a full game with somebody without them disconnecting or abandoning the game I am happy. That is the bigger problem here on this website, people walking away from games in progress. There is resign button people , use it!! As far as rematch's?? If I have time and enjoyed playing you then sure I will accept a rematch. If I defeated you easily , or if you played very slowly on every move, then I will probably not accept a rematch. If I offer a rematch and it is not accepted I simply move on with my life and play another game. I have actually offered a rematch , had if refused , started a new game and got matched up with exact same opponent who declined a rematch!! Funny!!

discoweasel

Nov 13, 2013

0

#32

Rsava wrote:

fouhad42 wrote:

hi

I want to expose ... they don't understand what is the meaning of fairplay.

Definition of "fair play" - Conformity to established rules.

Can you point to which established rule in the game of chess says that someon must offer you/accept a rematch? Just wondering because I have read the entire USCF rule book as well as the entire FIDE rule book and I do not remember that rule being in either set of established set of rules.

(I cannot find the definition of "fairplay", perhaps that is not really a word?)

Perhaps it is you who does not undestand the meaning of "fair play".

Maybe he really meant "foreplay". That could change the entire meaning of his message and stop much of the confusion.

macer75

Nov 13, 2013

0

#33

Again, seriously, take a look at this:

http://www.chess.com/forum/search?keyword=rematch

Annabella1

Nov 13, 2013

0

#34

wardguitar wrote:

People need to realize that others have lives outside of their computer and you can't possibly know whether they decline because they are 'aggressive' or decline because they have to go do something (or just don't want to play). For example, I declined a rematch yesterday because I had to go put my son to bed. There's nothing arrogant or negative about that. So many people on this site (and on the internet in general) make assumptions about their opponent's demeanor based on absolutely nothing. Other times I've declined rematches because it's 1 AM and I need to sleep. Or, you know, sometimes I like to pay attention to my family. Some people have lives outside of the internet!

Well said....I agree with Ward 100% ....

KCOLD

Nov 13, 2013

0

#35

agreed.....playing an opponent is a privledge not a right.....so take the game...win or lose if the opponent doesnt want a rematch work to not take it personally and move on......peace

chrka

Nov 13, 2013

0

#36

fouhad42 wrote:

Rsava a écrit :

Ok, tell me, fouhad42 - I live in America, eastern time zone (GMT -5). I am currently at work. I get 1 hour for lunch.

I eat my lunch and have 1/2 hour left on my lunch break. So I jump on chess.com for a quick game, a 10min one. If all time is used it is 20 minutes. I finish the game and now have 10 minutes left on my lunch break, not enough time for a rematch. I then come over to the forums for a quick read and find some guy from another time zone berating players who won't rematch.

Talk about a lack of respect. You sir, have no respect for other players.

ok. accordingly to your idea, if really someone hasn't enough time to play , there's a simple solution: in the chat area you can write a little sentence saying for example "I'm sorry I can't accept rematch" it will not take from you more than 10 seconds, then you can disconnect. but I have noticed here that some people in their discussions are a little bit intolerant, they can't open their minds to discuss objectively the facts. Sincerely, I'm disappointed.

Opening a (different) can of worms, some of us have disabled chat…

watcha

Nov 13, 2013

0

#37

Rematch is a fatigue of blitz. Somehow in blitz if someone loses it is thought to be because of 'chance' so it seems natural to request a rematch. My principle is to always go for the open request and I never accept rematch requests. I had some complaints about this by certain players.

Since I returned to standard time control rematch requests evaporated. Even in this regard standard time control is better.

wardguitar

Nov 13, 2013

0

#38

fouhad42 wrote:

wardguitar a écrit :

People need to realize that others have lives outside of their computer and you can't possibly know whether they decline because they are 'aggressive' or decline because they have to go do something (or just don't want to play). For example, I declined a rematch yesterday because I had to go put my son to bed. There's nothing arrogant or negative about that. So many people on this site (and on the internet in general) make assumptions about their opponent's demeanor based on absolutely nothing. Other times I've declined rematches because it's 1 AM and I need to sleep. Or, you know, sometimes I like to pay attention to my family. Some people have lives outside of the internet!

in some cases it can be true as you explain. but I'm sure in some others cases, those players are simply afraid of playing a rematch because they know that their win is only a question of luck and coincidence not a question of strengh, otherwise they would accept the rematch.

I can see where this happens on occasion, but the cases that I and others have mentioned are surely the more common reasons. The opponent being afraid of the rematch is just a big assumption on your part. I agree with you that one could write a note in chat explaining the reason, but in my case I have chat disabled (too many trashtalkers). I don't write a note on anyone's profile when declining though, because I don't assume that they think I'm afraid of playing again ... afterall, I can't assume what another person is thinking that I've never met before from across the planet.

Some people can be disrespectful (why my chat is disabled!), so I see the issue - I just don't think fear is the most common reason. So, your point of view isn't being ignored - I happen to have a different opinion as well.

fouhad42

Nov 13, 2013

0

#39

Omnifigment a écrit :

fouhad42 wrote:

everyone is free to think what he wants. I'm exposing my point of view, but what I have discovered through this discussion is that people here can't accept a different point of view: what I'm trying to say is that accepting a rematch is a question of RESPECT TO THE OPPONENT. furthermore, by declining a rematch it shows that the player is afraid of playing again because he won the game by luck or coincidence. If he was sure of his strengh, he would obviously accept the rematch.

Okay, look, "everyone is free to think what he wants," sure, but we are not obligated to agree with it. You aren't a king and we aren't your subjects. You created a thread on your thoughts; certainly you expect replies on that thought. If you don't wan replies, you could have not post at all in the first place.

And we're saying that people have real-life responsibilities, as well as physical and mental limits, too.

Blitz and bullet games are fast, but a normal chess game last about 30 minutes. Not all of us have all the time in the world to play this for hours, not to mention that some of us prefer 5 or 10 minutes break between games to avoid mental fatigue.

Chess is generally view as a quiet game. It isn't strange that people don't like to talk in a game; this is even more prevalent online. So don't be surprise when we decline without saying anything either (perhaps only a "good game" note).

Fair play, in chess, generally mean winning with our own ability, without third-party assistance (such as another person or a chess engine). It has nothing to do with accepting or refusing a rematch.

On this note, I'm thinking that you're mistaking fair play with sportmanship. Now, sportmanship encompasses much larger area (and happen to include fair play in it, too), but also vary slightly from person to person. It seems to fits more with your original post.

yes I think you're right. the word " sportmanship" could be more accurate than "fairplay". thanks for the advice.

FireAndLightz

Nov 13, 2013

0

#40

Why do so many people talk about rematches? If u want to play ones it is your own choice. You did not sign a contract to play twice against the Same opponent. And why do some people say that, declining a rematch is not fair? I think most people here are asking a rematch cos they think they can beat u. I dont like it to play twice against the Same opponent in a row. So I will decline the most rematches,But this is my view of the rematch problem ( dont tried to offense people )