Upper limit on games playing concurrently

Yes!!!!!!!!!!

#10!!!!!!

Perhaps the staff could create a trophy for Ray - some soap and water to wash his mucky mouth.

To be slightly fair, I have played in a tournament (single round, admittedly) with whom Ray terms the TOK. He will finish mid-table respectability, all his games now complete, but the tournament not. He has not held this one up.

 I, on the other hand, with my mighty 15 or so games, am accidentally holding up a tournament simply because my queen-down-in-the-endgame-without-any-realistic-swindle-material opponent has not resigned. Is perhaps not resigning lost games as great a cause for tournament delay.

I find my max to be around 40.  However, if you play in a manner that each position is a "find the best move" puzzle then there is no need to remember each game anymore.  you must also consider that in a 3 day time slot he also has the presumptive 1 to 3 days for you to move as well. 

The issue of using the vacation timer in order to solve his number of games abuse seems to violate the vacation policy.  You might mention it to someone on staff, if you notice your opponent is doing it regularly.  Eventually these people will run out of vacation time anyway, or go over the vaction time limit percentage for chess.com tournaments.  Either way, if your opponent is on vacation often bring it up to the staff.

Besides the possible abuse, you and your opponent officially (at least) agreed to the time limit.  This is not a live chess set up so the time limits allow for a different method of play and comfort.  For example, one of my school students beats me in correspondence unflinchingly.  However, if we play on a board with a clock he rarely wins, though he plays very competitively regardless, I just know I have an advantage with a clock.

Good luck, regardless of how you deal with this poarticular situation.

Yes I can see the frustration, with regard to some players use of thier gameload.

I do have to say again however I am not concerned with how long my opponent takes to move, and am participating in a similar Tournament.

With time per move and vacation a player can't hold out forever.

I have plenty of other games here (and elsewhere) to keep myself occupied. 

CAN'T  WE  ALL  JUST  GET  ALONG ?

CAN'T  WE  ALL  JUST  GET  ALONG ? well said (boring though).

 you Reb? don't believe it.

This tends to be a never ending debate. If you are playing at 3 days per move  I am pretty relaxed if my opponent takes the 3 days, although it can slow down tournaments..........but I like this site and for thoses faster players you need to chill out and relax when playing. I suggest a large malt whisky preferably a 10 year old MacAllan accompained with a nice cigar. 

i resigned 18 games against l---b will never play him again

my two cents....I was playing this "one who should not be named" in several games. His rating was high and I had winning position and now that he timed out a couple of hundred games and his rating hit the debts of the toliet I got a whole 1 point for winning the hard fought game!!!!

thanks and I still have games with him....now the rest of the games are pointless or worse yet if he wins now my rating takes a bigger hit!!!

Now that he has timed out over 200 games his rating is really low (like sandbagging) and the rest of my games against him have all risk and no reward...I gain 1 point for a win and risk losing close to 40 points!!! Is there anyway to get him to forfiet the rest of his games since this was not part of the deal when the games started...to drop over 900 rating points since he started the games with me is ridiculus

I am playing someone whose rating has dropped from the 1700's down to the 900's because of all the games he lost on time.  He had >900 games going this morning.

I don't want to judge his decision to play that many games, although I hope he finds a job and a girlfriend to keep him occupied.  However, this situation can be abused.

I think that there should be a rating floor (like the USCF has), so that if you lose on time your rating can only fall so far.  That would prevent people from artificially lowering their ratings to get into tournaments. 

It would also make the ratings better reflect a person's playing strength.  My opponent has the skills of an 1800 rated player, so the next 900 rated player who comes up against him will be in for a nasty surprise.  If his rating were no allowed to fall below 1600, then it would more accurately reflect his playing strength.

If you implement rating floors, then you have to look at some way of not giving rating points to the opponent of a timeout (unless they were winning).

No?

I am looking forward to He Who Must Not Be Named timing out in one of my tournaments - it will be the last game in it, and it will hopefully happen in 3 hours and 1 minute!

Am I a bad person?

i sold two shares of LB at 1155 and 1156.  i wish i could have sold them at peak value in the 1700+ range.  Hopefully, i'll be able to unload the next 2 shares at 750+ prices.  if the market kicks back in, i'm screwed, because the stocks should be priced in the 1800+ range.