Stalling in Daily Chess.

I generally play games that allow 3 days per move. Sometimes I make my move within a couple hours, but sometimes I take a day or two. There is such a thing as real life. Medical emergencies, errands that cannot wait, etc. Also, before I retired I spent 40 years meeting deadlines and keeping schedules set by my employers. I'm done with that. I like to play chess at my own pace, taking the time to set up the position and study it.

I so agree Antonin.

This isn't at all what people are talking about, and there's a vacation function. We're only talking about games that are *COMPLETELY LOST* for one side, both players know it, but one side takes *the maximum time to move possible*.

I'm sorry, but it takes more effort to use as much time as possible than to just move normally. If someone has a REAL EMERGENCY, they're not going to be timing their moves to occur every 14 days, perfectly, on-the-nose. This is twisting the core issue into something entirely different.

We're all well aware that people have reasons they may not be able to play their moves, but let's stick to the specifics: players who will be engaged in 100 games, actively playing all of them *EXCEPT THE ONES THEYVE LOST*. I can see them making moves each day, sometimes minutes a part, while my game sits there until there's 30 minutes left in a 14-day period.

Please, don't whitewash this topic. It's important, and it has absolutely nothing to do with emergencies or vacation mode. Use vacation mode if you need it, no one cares. Resign your totally, 100% lost positions though.

There are people in this thread who have games that've gone on for THREE YEARS. Trust me, it's NOT AN EMERGENCY. They're stalling and refusing to resign; this isn't an epidemic of broken knees or cracked ribs, it's literally poor sportsmanship, it's widespread, and we need to talk about it. Absolutely ZERO people have a problem with emergencies. That's a complete and total strawman.

Some people like to look closely at games to avoid making mistakes. Some people just have lots of daily games. (As of posting this, I have 42, but some people have way more). Some only want to do daily games once per day. 

That being said, if you don't want to have to wait a long time, then don't join daily games. Simple.

Which is why I never sign up for daily tournaments longer than 3 days a move. With current technology why would anyone want 14 days between moves?  Simple maths.

A game can easily last 50 moves. Per player. So 100x14 days - more than 4 years?

@ScroogeMcBird

Except what Antonin1957 mentions is kind of what we're talking about too. You seem to claim that the discussion is only about people who refuse to resign in a completely lost position where both players are aware of the fact, when it isn't. OP started the discussion to get some insight into why people take so long to move in general. Sure, the thread was resurrected by AdamMtl2021 in frustration over a few games he deems completely lost but calling someone out, with terms such as "whitewashing" or "strawmen" seems a bit silly, don't you think?

Now, about positions that are completely lost; I can come up with a few reasons why people play on, although I'm mostly reiterating what others have said already:

• Both players may not be aware of the fact that it is a completely lost position
• Even where both players would agree that either side is clearly losing, there could still be something to play for. It is no reason to give up just because you are down material. While refraining from making any more specific comments about AdamMtl2021's ongoing games (and I suggest you do the same as Chess.com could count that as cheating), I can safely say that there are games where I would continue to play as his opponent.
• Even in a lost position you could be able to lure your opponent into a stalemate
• People may have a schedule where they only visit Chess.com, or at least only consider their daily games, at certain times (say, every other day)
• While not having any direct emergencies, people may be otherwise busy and that one almost lost game on Chess.com may not be their top priority

Even in the case of clear stalling, the question of a completely lost position is hard to determine, as a chess engine will deem it lost long before a human does. The question then becomes when should Chess.com automatically cut off a game and declare one a winner and the other a staller? The answer is never. In doing so we would try to solve with code what is essentially a social problem.

Also, maybe I'm the odd one out but I have far more times won by timeout in cases where my opponent likes to "take their time", than been frustrated about stalling.

I do agree with you about emergencies though. No one who is going through a "rough patch" will be worrying about signing in to Chess.com to make a move at the absolute last minute.

i forget about it until it reminds me that i'm low in time xD

Your argument doesn't make any sense, insofar as it attempts to justify players who are intentionally stalling games.

It is not impossible for players to engage in intentional stalling, and whataboutisms are entirely unhelpful if you're genuinely interested in finding a resolution to a problem that bothers an awful lot of users.

I don't think you have any genuine interest in resolving anything here, it seems as though you want discussion to stop completely, and for absolutely zero resolution to be arrived upon by anybody involved in this thread.

Stalling is a huge problem; it's flagrant, obvious, and should be something we can easily report. Many people didn't know there was an option to pick opponents with average move times, as just one example. This simple feature greatly improves the quality of life for everyone using this site.

Let's be very clear: People are playing rated, competitive games. They want a resolution to a problem they think is serious. The mainstreaming of unsportsmanlike behavior is entirely unacceptable to me. These people need to play casual games. We should not have tournaments that last three years. I couldn't care less that there's a 1 in 500,000 chance of a draw. That's not fun. People are here to play chess and have fun; people who stall for 14 days a move *the moment they hang a queen* are absolutely ruinous for this site. 

Stop making excuses for these people. They're literally playing all their other games, and for some reason, the debate lords in this thread have realized that they need to ignore that very salient fact to keep their argument going.

Just... stop ignoring the facts. This is flagrant and abusive behavior. It needs to be stopped. How do we stop it?

One recent opponent has been on vacation in our daily game but at the same time playing blitz and bullet games. I suggest that anytime a player signs on, their vacation time switches off. This would at least stop some of the abuse of vacation time.

When you use phrases like "debate lords" you sound like exactly that--a "debate lord." When I responded to your concerns over game stalling with my own polite explanation for why some people including me might play more slowly than our opponents would like, you became increasingly argumentative and emotional. I'm not sure why. But, this is the internet, so my response to this endlessly swirling tempest in a teapot will be to just stop following this thread and leave you to it.

If the problem of game stalling bothers you so much I suggest you bring it up with chess.com support. Maybe they can help. Asking "how do we stop it?" here is not going to help.

Or perhaps the answer would be to find a club with decent people in it, and mostly play them. There are many, many trolls and immature people on chess.com, but there are also some nice people who are actually interested in chess. It would be well worth your while to seek them out and enjoy this beautiful game with them.

Goodbye.

I agree with Scrooge, but I personally don't care. They stall, I win, everybody's happy.

Nah, stalling in chess is bad no matter how many times you try to defend it, because you're wrong each time. When people are giving you the literal definition of bad sportsmanship and you're telling them to go pound sand, you're the one in the wrong.

If you want to say goodbye, delete your account.

Stalling is bad in live games because you have to sit and wait for the opponent to move.

In a daily game you've literally agreed to let them stall as much as they want to. When it's the other person's move you can just forget about it and go and do something else.

like jordan 1993

Playing near the maximum time limit is a good strategy for winning more games. Simple.