Chess Etiquette: Winning on time when you are extremely behind

Sort:
RubenHogenhout
Ziryab schreef:

Winning on time (or drawing) when way down on material is central to blitz and bullet without an increment. It's my own fault that I failed to win this game. Instead of the queen check, I should have cut off the king's escape by moving the rook to the e-file. Even with three seconds left, I should have known that.

 

Also there was nothing against  58.Qd3+ and 59.Re1#   in the game.

 

SmyslovFan

There are sites that allow a disconnection to count as a forfeit. I agree with that for blitz and bullet games, but not longer games.

 

I don't know what the poster who suffered from disconnections might hope to change. If anything, the site should be more stringent about disconnections, especially in fast time controls.

RubenHogenhout

Ziryab schreef:

Winning on time (or drawing) when way down on material is central to blitz and bullet without an increment. It's my own fault that I failed to win this game. Instead of the queen check, I should have cut off the king's escape by moving the rook to the e-file. Even with three seconds left, I should have known that.

What you also can do is not queen at all and just goes for a direct checkmate. 

CoolHandNuke
0110001101101000 wrote:

When I am in a winning position, but behind on the clock, I like to sacrifice my extra material so me and my opponent have exactly the same amount of pieces on the board. That way it's fair because you even the playing field.

The perfect response.

What OP needs to remember is that the opponent who was ahead on material got there, in part, by taking longer than OP to make his moves. That is a conscious decision made by that player which comes with consequences. I agree that it is not rude to win on time. If it were, there should not be any timed games.

LouStule

Losing on time when you have a winning position really hurts. That's why I started playing longer time controls...it helps a lot.  

its_only_me
uri65 schreef:
its_only_me wrote:

today i played a specimen that won as folllows : in a 5 minute game i lost connection twice, which set me behind for half the clock time, since his skill wasnt sufficient to win i got 2 pieces up, including the queen, the b*gger managed to win on time by hopping around like a madman... so many players here are completely honorless and chess.com does nothing against it ...

What are you complaing about? Your connection is not your opponent responsibility. Somebody with honour would rather fix it instead of complaining.

fix my provider?? hahaha you have humour :-)  I guess this is how you win :-))

 

 

its_only_me
ErikWQ schreef:
its_only_me wrote:

today i played a specimen that won as folllows : in a 5 minute game i lost connection twice, which set me behind for half the clock time, since his skill wasnt sufficient to win i got 2 pieces up, including the queen, the b*gger managed to win on time by hopping around like a madman... so many players here are completely honorless and chess.com does nothing against it ...

 

Boo hoo hoo get better internet.

haha another one that wants to debate and has no arguments its funny :-)

its_only_me
LouStule schreef:

Losing on time when you have a winning position really hurts. That's why I started playing longer time controls...it helps a lot.  

to the braindeads that debate without arguments : this is an example of a respectable answer, take example of it ...

 

or else you can start a club together : name it honorless and hopeless :-)

uri65
its_only_me wrote:
uri65 schreef:
its_only_me wrote:

today i played a specimen that won as folllows : in a 5 minute game i lost connection twice, which set me behind for half the clock time, since his skill wasnt sufficient to win i got 2 pieces up, including the queen, the b*gger managed to win on time by hopping around like a madman... so many players here are completely honorless and chess.com does nothing against it ...

What are you complaing about? Your connection is not your opponent responsibility. Somebody with honour would rather fix it instead of complaining.

fix my provider?? hahaha you have humour :-)  I guess this is how you win :-))

 

 

I win by any means within the rules. When playing on train and expecting disconnections I choose to play unrated. When my home WiFi had problems I played via my iPhone hotspot. You choose to play blitz on loosy connection and then to compain on the forums about losing on time. And then you preach about honours?!

glamdring27

People get far too hung up on chess etiquette.  If you want etiquette play over the board.  The only thing that matters in online Blitz or Bullet is playing within the rules.  If it is within the rules then of course it is fair, if it isn't within the rules then of course it isn't fair.

 

People just love to complicate things by adding in spurious ideas of etiquette.

 

I click a button to play a 5 minute game with someone.  When we start the game it is because we have both agreed to play a game of chess within a 5 minute time limit and using the rules of chess.  The only expectation I have of my opponent is that they don't break rules, mostly meaning that they don't use a computer.

 

Other than that everything is fine.  If I lose on time it doesn't matter what my position was, I was clearly unable to win the game within the allowed time so a loss is the expected result.  Likewise if I beat someone on time, they should play faster if they don't want a time scramble ending.

 

Someone who expects to be given a win despite failing to achieve it within the time agreed with their opponent at the start of the game has no 'etiquette' at all.

ErikWQ
its_only_me wrote:
ErikWQ schreef:
its_only_me wrote:

today i played a specimen that won as folllows : in a 5 minute game i lost connection twice, which set me behind for half the clock time, since his skill wasnt sufficient to win i got 2 pieces up, including the queen, the b*gger managed to win on time by hopping around like a madman... so many players here are completely honorless and chess.com does nothing against it ...

 

Boo hoo hoo get better internet.

haha another one that wants to debate and has no arguments its funny :-)

 

There's nothing to debate. You chose to play without increment, then came on here crying about honor after losing on time. Whining about that just makes you look like a big baby. I lose on time plenty but I don't come on here crying about it. Why? Because I chose to play without increment and didn't move fast enough. Because I know if I was the one up on time, I'd take the win without any hesitation. Last but not least, I know that NOBODY CARES. You lost a stupid online blitz game, get the hell over it.

WanderingPuppet

 it's pretty simple, if losing on time frequently, play quicker or a different time control. playing on a position like r v r is a waste of time but many top players take any advantage they can get.

TheCalculatorKid

What? If you agree to a time game you agree to play by the clock. You had better time management, you won the game. Well played.

TheCalculatorKid

redrum007 wrote:

have lost so many games whilst having a surmountable lead in material, not my fault the opponent didnt use his time to think and make good moves, on almost even position or a little imbalanced in material, is completely fine but one should resign if he is in a completely lost position.

 

 

Yes but if he wins, quite clearly the position is not lost.

TheCalculatorKid

JoeTheV wrote:

Put yourself in your opponent's shoes.  How would you feel if you were Black and he was White and he still managed to win although you have more material?  I get fed up already in plenty of games when my opponents refuse to resign when I am clearly winning but run out of time.

Winning on time in situations like this is to me poor sportsmanship, and doesn't reflect how the winner actually plays.  If anything, I think it's insulting and rude.

This doesn't apply though when both sides have comparable amounts of material.  But in games like the one mentioned above, it most certainly does apply as bad manners.

Why would he resign when he is going to win?

MickinMD

"I just won a game that I feel pretty scummy about. I was way down in material, but his timer ran out."

You shouldn't feel scummy at all. Your opponent took more time than allowed.  Should he have been allowed more thinking time than you?  Of course not!

All sports have rules that restrict play. In baseball, if a player hits two long fly balls out of the park, but both in foul territory, he not only gets no runs or hits for them, they are penalized as strikes.

I

 

 

glamdring27

Material is just one aspect of winning a game, time is another, no less important.  I have often played Blitz games were it has been very close until we are getting low on time, then I make a mistake in time pressure and go down in material, but I'm not just going to resign if I think I can win on time because if my opponent does lose on time it serves him right - I lost material precisely because I was taking account of the clock.  If my opponent players better moves because he is thinking longer then tough if he loses on time - anyone can just ignore the clock and get themselves into a superior position with no time to finish it off, that isn't the aim of the game!

 

All the more so as in many of those games it is me who has less time and my opponent still has 3 minutes while I have 30 seconds.  If he still loses on time in such a situation, as many have done, then it is fully deserved, whatever the board position.

SmyslovFan

Alekhine's quote that mishandling the time can be compared to a lawbreaker trying to excuse his crime by claiming he was drunk has been mentioned before, but I am not sure if it's been presented in full:

 

"An awful move, the fact that White was very short of time is, to my mind, as little to be considered as an excuse, as for instance the statement of the law-breaker that he was drunk at the moment that he committed the crime. the inability of an experienced master to deal with the clock should be considered as grave a fault as a miscalculation."

~From the tournament book on the Nottingham Chess tournament of 1936

Poompat

Time is part of the resource each player must manage; and each is given equal time at the beginning. Thus, winning on time is OK. But, personally, in "totally lost" position with absolutely no chance of a draw or win when opponent was going to run out of time (eg. 30sec without increment), I would rather "Offer draw". The opponent can decide to risk losing/try to win before flagging....

uri65
redrum007 wrote:
ErikWQ wrote:
redrum007 wrote:

have lost so many games whilst having a surmountable lead in material, not my fault the opponent didnt use his time to think and make good moves, on almost even position or a little imbalanced in material, is completely fine but one should resign if he is in a completely lost position.

 

 

 

Its also not your opponents fault that you didn't leave yourself enough time to convert.

 

lmao you here to play chess or basically see the other person lose on time, while giving away a lead of like 20 points or 10 points or even > 7 points .. sorry to say but im talking about playing chess here not racing against the clock, as far as a lot of people having this delusion of 'converting' your lead, we aint masters here, if you would have just seen my rating its around the 1500 mark and certainly not adequate to blitz moves to a win when under time pressure, but certainly to think and make good moves and have a healthy lead early on , so please think before you speak ! also lets play together and see if i just make pawn moves 1 step and defending and you playing for a win and we'll see if you can barely even scratch the surface @ converting lmao  also they dont even accept a draw P.S i wasnt talking about bullet games here

 

 

"Racing against the clock" is part of playing chess just as much as making good moves. If you don't like this it's your problem.

Why somebody should accept a draw when they can win within the rules? If you don't like the rules you can always play other games.