Is a Win a Win?
Sort:
Hey guys... I have been wondering wether it is better to win by time or to accept they're better and resign. There has been some instances where I have been significantly low in material and still won by time. I find this funny. Then deep down, honor said "resign. He deserves this win." Yet, I still go on to win in time. Lol.
Yessss but afterwards if your opponent is truly better, then the win will mean nothing but a point.
Jul 19, 2016
0
#5
Nope.. Timing is part of the game... You decide what to do with it.. Spend the whole time thinking and playing the best moves.... or playing inaccurate moves but quickly...
Timing and strategy in chess go hand in hand... You decide which one to trade for the other.. ... And more so if your opponent is truly better... winning him just once doesn't make you better.... So rule's rules for me. I think I've used up my free words for today!
That really helped my understanding! Thanks for sharing your free words!
Jul 19, 2016
0
#7
You play the clock, not the opponent. Someone said that once, right? Essentially, you play yourself, not the opponent.
GuudFuurYuu wrote:
That really helped my understanding! Thanks for sharing your free words!
Who says they're free? Didn't you know that on chess.com, the OP needs to pay a dollar every 10 words to people who respond to their threads?
Jul 20, 2016
0
#9
Everyone read these articles
Chess- a world of exitement
What do you think?
The world of chess
if chess.com
Jul 21, 2016
0
#10
This thread reminds me of the the biblical quote...
"What shall it profit a a man If he claims the whole pieces
and loses on time.......?" [modified]
Is a win a win? Hmm... That's a tough one...
Be humble and accept defeat if it is a casual long game. They are OTB rules against winning on time I think.
Jul 21, 2016
0
#13
There aren't rules in OTB against winning on time. Ivanchuck I think lost several games on time a few years ago if I recall correctly.
Jul 21, 2016
0
#14
Don't play bullet if it's not for you. I don't play blitz anymore for the same reasons. Some people are better suited, no matter what. Even more I find insulting playing it lately.
Candidate35 wrote:
There aren't rules in OTB against winning on time. Ivanchuck I think lost several games on time a few years ago if I recall correctly.
I thought there was a rule. I thought in classical OTB (I've never actually played) there was a rule that states that a person isn't allowed to play on in a hopeless position when it's clear that they are only still playing purely to win on time. That's what I've heard. Sounds ridiculous to me.
ChessOath wrote:
Candidate35 wrote:
There aren't rules in OTB against winning on time. Ivanchuck I think lost several games on time a few years ago if I recall correctly.
I thought there was a rule. I thought in classical OTB (I've never actually played) there was a rule that states that a person isn't allowed to play on in a hopeless position when it's clear that they are only still playing purely to win on time. That's what I've heard. Sounds ridiculous to me.
The game is declared a draw if the arbiter determines that the side in a hopeless position is simply trying to win on time.
Edit: To be clear, this is only when the other side (the side with less time) requests that the arbiter stop the game. If neither player makes a sound, the game goes on normally.
Jul 21, 2016
0
#17
ChessOath wrote:
Candidate35 wrote:
There aren't rules in OTB against winning on time. Ivanchuck I think lost several games on time a few years ago if I recall correctly.
I thought there was a rule. I thought in classical OTB (I've never actually played) there was a rule that states that a person isn't allowed to play on in a hopeless position when it's clear that they are only still playing purely to win on time. That's what I've heard. Sounds ridiculous to me.
It does sound ridiculous, thankfully it's not true. You are always allowed to play on, unless it's like a bishop + king versus a lone king in which you won't even be awarded a win if the lone king runs out of time since you have no possible way to checkmate.
What macer said is what I've heard before. Is it true or isn't it?
He means a game point not a rating point. You know, like 1 or 1/2 or 0.
ChessOath wrote:
What macer said is what I've heard before. Is it true or isn't it?
See the second rule under "Rules governing time trouble."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_trouble