I've been disappointed before but I never feel as if I stole the victory away from them due to the clock.
The fun thing about playing in person is after someone wins on time you can just stop the clock and finish the game (if the position is still interesting).
Depends on the game.
When it was a relentless struggle and my opponent barely managed to scratch a very inferior but drawn position by consuming tons of time, no (I feel that I deserve to win). When I win in opposite-colored bishop endgames where everything is blocked but the opponent does not take draw offers, neither (they wanted it).
What happens sometimes though, is that I start playing fast when my opponent gets in time trouble, then get a totally losing position because of a blunder, then just keep playing and timeout the guy with something like one less rook. Then I feel a bit guilty afterwards.
I don't feel bad winning on time. The players agreed to the time control in advance.
The only exception to this is when the site mangles the lag and ruins the game. If a player tells me he made a move, waited for me to reply, then watched as his time ran out, I will almost always offer a rematch.
I definitely do not enjoy winning on time, especially when I'm down on material with little compensation.
If the game is close then I don't really think about it. But if I'm in a lost endgame and can just time the other player out the win won't mean much to me. It just doesn't feel like other sports where running the clock can be a good strategy.
If it's Blitz I generally wouldn't feel bad because it's an integral part of strategy. I reckon you should set out to use time against your opponent, think on her/his clock and prompt them calculate as much as possible. Of course everyone would play better with more time, so it's lame when people are 3 minutes down on a 5 minute game and whine about only winning on time. If they are clearly timed out that was their strategic miscalculation. Or if it’s close and at the end I blunder, I’ll play for time.
But when I play someone who just out classed me from start to finish and there are seconds to win a victory completely against the spirit of that game, then I typically resign.
sometimes in game the other person is winning and there time runs out and it says i have one but i havn't really so i feal kinda bad for them losing
I play blitz to add that extra element of challenge and intrigue. It's just as valid to win by time as by checkmate, and I work that angle as well. If you feel guilty about winning on time, just play games that take forever until you no longer feel guilty.
I don't feel bad winning on time in blitz games, as time is an important aspect of blitz. Nor do I feel bad winning on time in club games, again time management plays an important part in both long and blitz games in the club. But as I normally play 3 day games on chess.com, I have occasionally found that if I get a better position, not necessarily an out and out win, my opponent just lets the time run out. Win or lose, I would prefer to play the game to its conclusion, where one player either resigns or is mated.
Im i the only one who feels bad winning on time