kaynight wrote:
Quite right, scum of the earth...
Indeed , sorta like hooligans ! 
Playing to win on time.
Sort:
Mar 17, 2015
0
#23
I am not aware that there is a "chess code of honor." If a person loses on time he loses. Position is irrelevant. If the loser thinks he would have won if it weren't for the clock then maybe he needs to rethink his chess strategy. Doesn't everyone play better when they have more time to think about a move. Next time think faster. The person with the poor postion who won on time was a quick enough thinker to figure out he would win on time if he played a different strategy.
Mar 17, 2015
0
#24
Tetrini wrote:
I am not aware that there is a "chess code of honor." If a person loses on time he loses. Position is irrelevant. If the loser thinks he would have won if it weren't for the clock then maybe he needs to rethink his chess strategy. Doesn't everyone play better when they have more time to think about a move. Next time think faster. The person with the poor postion who won on time was a quick enough thinker to figure out he would win on time if he played a different strategy.
At least someone else is seeing the light! Others on this thread have no compelling arguement for their name calling tirade so they need to shout much louder!
I don't understand why some here say it is unfair or low class to win on time in an even position. You used more time to get to the even position than I did. That means I'm a better player. If somebody doesn't want to lose on time they shouldn't use a clock. Friggin crybabies.
I used to give my opponents the game if they were clearly winning because I don't want points I didn't earn but time after time people would stall me out when I was winning. One guy I played twice, first game he was up a knight and had an extra pawn that would promote but he was out of time so I resigned. Game two I was up two pawns and completely winning but low on time, do you think he resigned? F### no he took the time win. The point of my little story is don't worry about taking a win you don't deserve because if the tables were turned they would take the win from you in a heartbeat.
Mar 18, 2015
0
#27
denner90 wrote:
I don't understand why some here say it is unfair or low class to win on time in an even position. You used more time to get to the even position than I did. That means I'm a better player. If somebody doesn't want to lose on time they shouldn't use a clock. Friggin crybabies.
I don't think that it's just some people here. Time increments, time delays, FIDE Appendix G and USCF 14H (insufficient losing chances) were introduced to stop players from making aimless moves in order to win on time.
When I play most of my wins are time (I rarely am HEAVLY offensive my main way to play is defensive)
The clock is a part of the game. A win on time is a win nonetheless. A poor clock manager may make great moves, but a poor tactician makes great clock moves sometimes. It's a perfectly reasonable, legal and effective strategy and any belief otherwise makes those who run out of time, the sore loser, or unsportsmanlike. Good question, I can't believe there are people That disagree with fundamental rules of the game - check yourself (haha).
Its not cheating to win on time in positions like K+R v K+R , its just low class and there are plenty of low class people on the internet .
Exactly. If you play these positions on time, you don't break any rules but you are low class (and quite unfair)