Chess.com sneaks a cheap shot

Sort:
jaaas
Xieff wrote:

hess is chess, not time involved, but when playing a timed game then clocks are important and ppl use their time how they feel is wisest. If they cannot win then too bad for them lol. There is a penalty for sluggishness.

There is no "sluggishness" in blitz; if anything, there is "halfway reasonable" (versus "conciously haphazard to conserve time") play.

Bobby Fischer brought the time increment to chess exactly for this reason - so that the player who has achieved a won position on the board has a chance to convert his win, as opposed to essentially handing over the win to a player who chose to play fast and haphazardly in order to win on time in a lost (but not immediately lost) position, which happens all to often in sudden death blitz/bullet.

Chess.com seems to ignore this given that essentially no tournaments with a time increment (such as 5/8 or 10/5) are available, by the argument that "time increments benefit cheaters by possibly allowing them to copy engine moves to the end, which sudden-death does not".

dashkee94

Xieff

I understand.  I didn't get into this thread to argue, but to enlighten.  I see a lot of these threads about draw rules and at times I get carried away.  So I'm sorry if I came across a little strong.  I'm the same as you, I normally have more time at the end of the game than my opponent, and I have been burned by that, but that's chess, right?  I once gave a draw to a guy  on here that played well enough to kill me, but couldn't find the killer line.  I felt he had played too well to lose, but I wasn't about to resign.  I offered a draw when he had less than 5 seconds left, and he accepted.  But I don't expect any one else to do that, and I wouldn't accept that from my students, but there you go. 

woton
Xieff wrote:

 

...And woton it may be USCF official rules but not all tournaments play by these rules." 

Your post referred to the USCF and stated that it was a win even when there was insufficient material.  This is not in accordance with USCF rules.

You may have played in a tournament where  different rules were used.  However, if a rating report was submitted to the USCF, the tournament should have been conducted in accordance with USCF rules.

bean_Fischer
indian1960 wrote:

Mr. Bean ? (looking down) what do you just say ?

Indiana, just saying. (looking up and down)

bean_Fischer

Xieff, Chess uses a clock, but it's not the clock alone. They are together, chess and the clock.

Without the clock, you would have lost, at most a draw.

With the clock, you get the draw immediately, which is the utmost result.

But you can't win because you can't checkmate your opponent.

indian1960

Mr. Bean ? am i candy to your eyes ? (gawd ur fun 2 flirt w/ !)

winerkleiner

It's happened to me before.

indian1960

just before WK ?

Scottrf
DeweyOxberger wrote:
Scottrf wrote:

Official rules, use the search bar on the right for insufficient material.

These "do a search" answers are very unhelpful.

Trying to teach life skills. All these sort of questions can be answered with a chess.com or google search.

Xieff

dashkee94: You have students?

woton: USCF rules should be applied I aggree but aren't always. Not all tournaments are strict; they should be but aren't always lawful according to USCF rules.

bean_fischer: Without a clock I would have thought longer and with much more consideration and probably would have won. With a clock I was forced to process a lot faster resulting in a skimpy result and semi foolish moves. (I am better at longer games; In blitz I really down play cuzza time) Yes clocks are used together with chess but exactly my point; time should be respected as a lethal threat.(depending on where you are playing)

indian1960: Kinda weird no offense I just didn't think you were the flirting type. I thought you seemed like a more serious your lady...I mean what if bean_fischer is an weird old ugly man? (not saying you are bean_fischer lol)

jadarite: I am not complaining about the time running out; I am complaining about me not winning cuz my opponent's time ran out. :)

ivandh
Xieff a écrit :

jadarite: I am not complaining about the time running out; I am complaining about me not winning cuz my opponent's time ran out. :)


Those are the rules, grow up and deal with it. Maybe next time you shouldn't lose all your pieces and still expect to win.

Xieff
ivandh wrote:
Xieff a écrit :

jadarite: I am not complaining about the time running out; I am complaining about me not winning cuz my opponent's time ran out. :)


Those are the rules, grow up and deal with it. Maybe next time you shouldn't lose all your pieces and still expect to win.

I played blitz and didn't run out of time. You can grow some brain lol! I know those are the rules now. Whether they are fair or not. Also grow a good attitude. T

Justified08

it happened to me once. i guess i was happy, cuz i was down a R+N+P+P+P.

nxrosco
Xieff wrote:

 I do appreciate all the imput but I do play USCF. So I know.

The fact that everyone who has posted in this tread so far dissagrees with you suggests that it might be a good idea for you to double check the rules in the USCF handbook. You do have a copy, don't you?

ivandh
nxrosco a écrit :
Xieff wrote:

 I do appreciate all the imput but I do play USCF. So I know.

The fact that everyone who has posted in this tread so far dissagrees with you suggests that it might be a good idea for you to double check the rules in the USCF handbook. You do have a copy, don't you?


No, no, it must be that everyone else on a chess website is wrong (can't possibly be me!)

DrFrank124c

The rules are the rules, if you do not like the rules there is only one answer--revolution! The peasants are revolting! Of course they are, they haven't bathed in years!

macer75
macer75 wrote:
Xieff wrote:
harryz wrote:

but if fide changed the rules so that when a player runs out of time he loses no matter how much material ur opponent has, the player thats about to run out of time can purposely blunder all his pieces so that there would be an insufficient material draw. thats not how we should play chess

Yeah if he could do that but his opponent doesn't have to take the pieces. The reverse isn't completely true. I conserved my time as to not run out. That was my wise strategy. Good for me. lol If you cannot bring your opponent to his knees and take the win in the selected amount of time then you have failed. This is fair in my mind. At least for blitz. Because the whole point of blitz is super quick time control.

Well according to that logic, if the game ends with lone King vs long King, then whoever has more time at that point should be declared the winner.

Xieff: I posted this earlier, and I'm curious to hear what are your thoughts on K vs K situations. Should the side that has more time at the moment the game becomes K vs K be declared the winner, or should both players move their Kings around as fast as they can until one side runs out of time?

hostine
[COMMENT DELETED]
winerkleiner
indian1960 wrote:

just before WK ?

I can't remember, I need to swim on it!Smile

Xieff

Guys you aren't understanding what I am saying. I am not disaggreing on what the rules are, I do not have a rulebook. I am whining about what I think they should be. Don't like it? Well then keep telling me so. And not in k vs k situations it should be a draw because there is no material for anyone. But when someone does have the material you simply keep playing.