Mostly cowards here...

Coward! 

Again, the “two out of three” and/or “three out of five“ option would solve the problem.

Ha ha, Fidel, good one. But I do see their point in blocking me when I don’t rematch; as many of us have been pointing out over and over and over, it’s annoying to play people who don’t rematch. If someone rematches me at least once, I’m fine. And trust me, look through my history, I have let people bludgeon me to death with rematches. I realize that I could be knocked down to a zero rating; however, I will still be playing people, like I am now, who have the history or capability of playing 1600 all the way through 2100 level. Sometimes I do play people whose history is low, but I am confident in my approximate 1400 average rating. I sometimes go up over 1500 sometimes go down to a high 1200, but I am typically around 1400.

No, bunny, I’m not a coward, I do rematches when I can. If I can’t do one, it’s not because I’m a coward, it’s because I can’t do it. I fill well understand that I might be calling some people cowards when they’re not, because they simply can’t rematch, but then they come back at me with her explanation and everything’s fine. It would save a lot of time to have two out of three or 3 to 5. Does anyone know of a site that does that?

Unless, of course, you have only a set amount of time to play and would rather not use it playing one person over and over.

Optimist, go ahead and block me; that way, you won’t have to be reminded not to play me.

These people are Lost somewhere in the Blocking Twilight Zone.

The LBTZ - sniffs out Cowards upon request !

I have no problem with a diminished player pool if it means people who want rematches only play each other.

I play Crazyhouse quite often and the waiting time for that is longer anyway, I'm not in that much of a hurry usually that I need to be paired up in 3 seconds.

Yeah, the great attorney, that’s a good point. Only use the feature if you have time to do it. What I would do.

No! No, no, no. It has been posted over and over. Nothing happened. What does that tell you?

Do you know the definition of insanity that is commonly attributed to Einstein?

The game of chess has brought pleasure to millions of people for over five centuries, It never needed a rematch clause to flourish. We have had many world champions, form Steinitz, Lasker, and Capablance up to Karpov, Kasparov, and Carlsen. I've never heard about any of these great players whine about rematches. So it's not surprising that the pathetic complaints of a handful of losers hasn't had much influence

Well, in Capablanca's case he whined a lot about Alekhine not giving him a rematch. Just saying.

---

Op's wall is deleted now but post #9 explained a lot of things.

People offer to rematch me sometimes when they win and sometimes when they lose. I almost never accept. I like to take a moment to recharge and don't like to play games back to back. I never try to rematch an opponent. If I beat them, I would benefit by finding a more challenging opponent. If they beat me, that's disappointing. Why subject myself to what will likely be further disappointment? What's more, why do even more to myself by being the one to ask for the disappointment by rematching? It's masochistic!

"Well, in Capablanca's case he whined a lot about Alekhine not giving him a rematch. Just saying"

Well, he didn't demand a rematch after every game,  There's just the tiniest difference between a world championship match and a single blitz game on chess.com

He wanted a WCC match. Alekhine was world champion. So, by elementary logic, he asked for a rematch.

It isn't always cowardly not to offer a rematch. Some people won't because they are scared, but I prefer to play different people, whether I win or lose. I find playing one person to much makes me focus too specifically on certain areas of chess.

There's a type of person who will just always label anyone who doesn't rematch when they want them to as 'runners' or 'cowards' and who can't be reasoned with.  They know every person on the planet personally so of course they know the motivations of every person who rejects a rematch.  We have to bow down to that awe-inspiring knowledge.

Why the h... should anybody be "scared" of a rematch?

You might consider being scared of a rematch if you are playing with someone who has 800 more points than you or something. Usually, though, it isn't really something to be scared of, but some people will be scared anyway. I just don't think there are that many people out there who think that you are either a player offering/accepting a rematch or a coward.

If my opponent is 800 rating points above me, I have nothing to lose at all and I'm certainly totally not scared. Also, it's absolutely not clear why a rematch should be scarier than a completely new match. The whole idea that there are players out there who are scared to play an online chess game is completely ridiculous. Even more so are the players who think people are scared of them.

That does make sense. Okay. I still stand to the fact that I prefer to play a different person after each match, though.