Rematching

Sort:
thesoulwatcher

I sometimes decline a rematch after a game, because I prefer 30 min games... so if I have other things going on in life and don't have time for another game, or feel brain boggled after an intense long game, I might not feel like another game right away. Don't take it personally if someone declines, perhaps they have their own personal reason.

vicentGB

Hello.

So, one question, just to (try to) make things clearer: people who think it is rude not to ask or accept rematches, what is the polite way, what is the right behaviour, according to your point of view?

I mean, am I supposed to ask for rematch when I loose, or when I win? Only if I have a better score, or only if I have a lower one?

Thank you in advance.

eddysallin
ozzie_c_cobblepot wrote:

@eddysallin Wishing you good vibes for your health

Thank you,a very nice thought.

CTTransplant

I thought we were playing for enjoyment and that if you enjoyed the game you would offer a rematch. I never realized the slew of complex affronts that could occur. Silly me.

jwhitesj

Most of the time I don't accept a rematch for several reasons.

1.  Happens most often, I'm allready playing another game

2. I'm reviewing the game and I want to concentrate on that.

3. I want to have a cig

4. I need to go somewhere

5. I don't want to play another game of chess at the moment

So none of that is being rude, it's just the way life is.  The thought of having to accept a rematch is silly in my opinion.  It's nothing personal, get over yourself if you tink the person didn't accept a rematch because they are afraid of you.  The reason your opponent didn't accept your rematch probably has nothing to do with you so don't take it personally.

ozzie_c_cobblepot

@vicentGB Unless otherwise specified, in writing, etiquette is to issue/accept at least one rematch, if the etime of the previous match was 6 or less. In the range of 7-10, it is recommended, and above 10 it is entirely optional. In case of a series of matches (exceeding 4 total games), it is etiquette to let the opponent know, during a game, that this is the last game. This message must be delivered before move 8 in a non-book opening, and before move 12 in a book opening.

ClavierCavalier

That's pretty specific.

vicentGB

@ozzie, Thank you.

Anyway, the rematch should be asked for by the one who loosed the last game, shouldn't it?

When you say "etime", you mean number of moves, don't you?

bcoburn2

I don't rematch because I need time to digest the last game before I began a new one.

c95s011

once again, BLOCK any member who plays 1 game and runs away, especially after a Win...

ozzie_c_cobblepot

Once again, you should be more specific. Playing one 30 minute game does not require a rematch.

ClavierCavalier

One should just block ALL chess.com members to prevent any offense they might cause.

varelse1
[COMMENT DELETED]
alec44
watmel1 wrote:

Is anybody else tired of people not rematching after one victory, especially after they play white or a time victory? My brother tells me that at levels 1400 and on people usually be fair and rematch but at the lower level I'm currently at, it seems nobody ever rematches after close victories 

People online are not good losers their ego gets bruised they beg for a rematch then they cheat with an impossible to beat program or resort to dirty tricks to get their points back not nice but it happens.

c95s011

If your opponent gives no reason, and if he had the white pieces my advice is to BLOCK that user...

Ziryab

Block 'em all. Erik will sort them out.

ozzie_c_cobblepot

Is there a limit on the block list? How would the site (theoretically) perform if every single user had a block list in the hundreds?

bobbyDK

rematch request should come within 20 seconds after the game otherwise I am on to the next game. I never issue but I nearly always accept unless I have to do something else.

Ziryab
ozzie_c_cobblepot wrote:

Is there a limit on the block list? How would the site (theoretically) perform if every single user had a block list in the hundreds?

If there is a limit, it is far more reasonable that the free chess server that caps the list at 50.

ClavierCavalier
ozzie_c_cobblepot wrote:

Is there a limit on the block list? How would the site (theoretically) perform if every single user had a block list in the hundreds?

Well, I prefer my solution of blocking every chess.com member to prevent any possible offense.  The site may not have any chess games, but it'd be civil.