Forums

Stalling/quitting games… I just sat here and waited for someone to let the clock run out…

Vlandian_Knight
BulletMaster443 wrote:

Sometimes if they disconnect, you can report them immediately and it will immediately auto-resign.

Good to know. One game yesterday, the opponent disconnected over ten times. This was baffling so I sent him a message thanking him for the game and asking what happened?

Apparently he was on a train.

CrusaderKing1
bishoppairchess wrote:
CrusaderKing1 wrote:
bishoppairchess wrote:
CrusaderKing1 wrote:
Kapivarovskic wrote:
CrusaderKing1 wrote:
Kapivarovskic wrote:
CrusaderKing1 wrote:
Kapivarovskic wrote:
CrusaderKing1 wrote:

Because stalling games is subjective, I think if someone has 30 minutes then you should be prepared to sit there until their clocks run out.

I've been accused of stalling when thinking of a move, or the move after a move. If you can't handle the clock times, then play something faster.

 Thinking of a move is different than stalling, my dude. Stalling is when you're in an absolutely lost position like waiting for mate in one, or down a lot of material with absolute no counterplay and instead of resigning or playing till mate people just let the clock run out to overcompensate the frustration of their micrope.nis.. i guess that somehow makes them feel better

All I know is that if I have a clock that gives me "x" time, then I can use that "x" anyway I want. 

 

Lmao  triggered

You shouldn't be proud of that g

I don't stall. But if I have 10 minutes, expect me to use all 10 minutes as I see fit. 

 

I do expect people to use their time, it doesn't change the fact that you're stalling. No one is saying it's forbidden or illegal. It's just poor etiquette/sportsmanship. And very annoying. It's disrespectful. People are just trying to enjoy an activity they like in whatever little free time they have and instead of playing chess they are watching a clock reach zero, but it's fine some people have respect, some people don't. Read my previous post, as I said you're high rated enough to spot an obvious mate in one. And if you're waiting for 8 out of your total 10 minutes when you know for a fact there is absolutely nothing you can do: no counterplay, no chance of flagging, no tactical attempts, no resources of any kind to try and pull at least a draw, no matter what you do, you considered every legal move and still mate in one next move... well then you clearly have issues and you're burning time out of spite, regardless of what you tell yourself and others. And that is the textbook definition of stalling

My point is that it's not possible to know when someone is stalling or having to attend to a real life situation, etc...therefore making it reportable is nonsensical. 

If they have done it repeatedly, you can make a fair estimation that they are full of it.

Again, that's pushing subjectivity. This isn't aborting games or cheating, where are much more objective and clear. We are talking about pressuring people to move faster for fear of the stalling rule, and I find it ridiculous. 

That is not the case. There is a second clock on how long to make your move. Its totally fair especially in a lost position.  It's not unreasonable to expect your opponent to make his move. 

The real problem is the number of players who take advantage of the good will of others and abuse the rules. Those should be dealt with accordingly. 

Yes, there is a second clock, which again, that clock will tell you when it's stalling when the time runs out and he gets kicked off. I don't think stalling will ever not be subjective. 

melvinbluestone
bishoppairchess wrote:
melvinbluestone wrote:
bishoppairchess wrote:

Lol @ changing a diaper which causes person to "accidentally" timeout. That is such nonsense. If you are playing a game, finish it and stop coming up with excuses as to why you coincidentally couldn't finish the game, at the EXACT moment you were losing. 

The fact is, stalling happens all the time and the ones being forced to wait should have some recourse. Ten times worse when it's correspondence.

What is the excuse for making 1 king move a week in a lost position such as queen and king vs king position? 

   "Forced to wait"...... that's a laugh! What a hardship! You actually have to wait for your opponent to use all the time you agreed he had before you started the game.

      No, you shouldn't have any recourse. You know this can happen before you start the game. You want to change the rules in the middle of the contest. "You have ten minutes, unless you get a bad position. Then you have less time."

Yes we should have recourse and chess.com agrees. So there is really no discussion to be had. 

    No, you're wrong! And I can prove it. When you say that.......  oops! Gotta' go! I have to change my baby's diaper..... wink.png

FloofyGatito

This is called sandbagging and it is ban-worthy

Kapivarovskic
CrusaderKing1 wrote:
Kapivarovskic wrote:
CrusaderKing1 wrote:
Kapivarovskic wrote:
CrusaderKing1 wrote:
Kapivarovskic wrote:
CrusaderKing1 wrote:

Because stalling games is subjective, I think if someone has 30 minutes then you should be prepared to sit there until their clocks run out.

I've been accused of stalling when thinking of a move, or the move after a move. If you can't handle the clock times, then play something faster.

 Thinking of a move is different than stalling, my dude. Stalling is when you're in an absolutely lost position like waiting for mate in one, or down a lot of material with absolute no counterplay and instead of resigning or playing till mate people just let the clock run out to overcompensate the frustration of their micrope.nis.. i guess that somehow makes them feel better

All I know is that if I have a clock that gives me "x" time, then I can use that "x" anyway I want. 

 

Lmao  triggered

You shouldn't be proud of that g

I don't stall. But if I have 10 minutes, expect me to use all 10 minutes as I see fit. 

 

I do expect people to use their time, it doesn't change the fact that you're stalling. No one is saying it's forbidden or illegal. It's just poor etiquette/sportsmanship. And very annoying. It's disrespectful. People are just trying to enjoy an activity they like in whatever little free time they have and instead of playing chess they are watching a clock reach zero, but it's fine some people have respect, some people don't. Read my previous post, as I said you're high rated enough to spot an obvious mate in one. And if you're waiting for 8 out of your total 10 minutes when you know for a fact there is absolutely nothing you can do: no counterplay, no chance of flagging, no tactical attempts, no resources of any kind to try and pull at least a draw, no matter what you do, you considered every legal move and still mate in one next move... well then you clearly have issues and you're burning time out of spite, regardless of what you tell yourself and others. And that is the textbook definition of stalling

My point is that it's not possible to know when someone is stalling or having to attend to a real life situation, etc...therefore making it reportable is nonsensical. 

 

That wasn't your point at first but ok... if you study a little bit of basic statistics you'll learn that is possible to estimate with 99% accuracy whether they're stalling or not based on data analysis.... you'd also be surprised how much chess.com have access to your computer it even knows when you're changing tabs so if you're  watching cats on youtube instead of making your move chess.com knows you're stalling)

And once again how is it pressuring people to move faster when they KNOW it's mate in one?

Let me draw for you to make it simpler. 

 

 

Here is another one:

 

How about 

Since i was 700 rated I knew that these were unstoppable mates just by glancing at the board. 

Magnus Carlsen, stockfish, alphazero, you, me, my little cousin, every alien in the universe, Bobby Fischer's ghost, anyone on this website or even Caissa herself couldn't make these games last 2 moves and pretty much anyone above 1000 rating points know this so don't give me the excuse that you need 10 minutes to realize that there is absolutely nothing you can do to stop check-mate. Don't you find a little too coincidental that it is always in positions like these that they suddenly have to change a diaper?  Give me a break....

If your baby needs changing or someone rings your doorbell it takes less than 2 seconds to resign or make a move or at the very least have the courtesy of typing in the chat, so do us all a favor and stop trying to justify the unjustifiable and just come clean that you're a terrible sportsman who enjoys stalling for god knows what reason and we can call it a day =]

 

 

 

Kapivarovskic
melvinbluestone wrote:

    @Kapivarovskic:

        I agree with everything you say. I just don't understand why this is such a huge issue with so many players online. Is letting your clock run out in a lost position bad sportsmanship? Of course it is. But so what? Bad sports exist. It's part of life. Was Kasparov a bad sport when he stormed off the stage after losing to the IBM computer? Yes. How about John McEnroe when he threw all those tantrums on the tennis court? Another bad sport. They're out there. They exist. When you play chess online, there's always the possibility you may have to wait out the entire time allotted to your opponent. You know that going in. Whether your opponent's clock runs out because they don't want to give you the satisfaction mating them, or they went to answer the phone, what's the difference? You win either way. Why waste so much time and energy griping and whining and moaning about it, instead of just moving on? 

    My point is that while players who are bad sports have an obvious character flaw, so do the players who complain about them. Like "I'm shocked! Shocked to find that their are players who are bad losers!" (my apologies to Captain Renault). 

     And I'm an even bigger idiot for even bothering to address this issue! As long as there are rude, inconsiderate, disrespectful schmucks playing chess online, they'll be people griping about them......

    Now, where's my copy of that Steinbeck classic, The Gripes of Wrath?

 

I don't know if it would qualify as a huge issue, but it is an issue nevertheless. And if criticizing terrible sportsmanship by shi.tty people is a character flaw you need to seriously reevaluate your criteria.

 

Most people are not shocked when people stall. They're annoyed. When Kasparov rage quit after losing he wasn't wasting a hard-working citizen's leisure time, people there at the venue were getting paid.  When Johnny Mac succumbed to pressure (which is a lot more in a professional tennis match than online chess) and threw his tantrums he didn't hurt his opponent, nor the tantrum itself stopped his opponent from advancing to next round, nor did the ump get fired or whatever. Everyone there was getting paid, except for the crowd, whose vast majority had a blast and loved watching him throw tantrums. Bad sports? Yes, but completely different context.

And still they were punished for being badsports in some form or another (or at least should have been), so why shouldn't people here be as well? For those and many other reasons the stalling report is not only welcomed but extremely necessary

melvinbluestone

    @Kapivarovskic:

      I stand corrected! Thanks.

Mpirani
Kapivarovskic wrote:
melvinbluestone wrote:

    @Kapivarovskic:

        I agree with everything you say. I just don't understand why this is such a huge issue with so many players online. Is letting your clock run out in a lost position bad sportsmanship? Of course it is. But so what? Bad sports exist. It's part of life. Was Kasparov a bad sport when he stormed off the stage after losing to the IBM computer? Yes. How about John McEnroe when he threw all those tantrums on the tennis court? Another bad sport. They're out there. They exist. When you play chess online, there's always the possibility you may have to wait out the entire time allotted to your opponent. You know that going in. Whether your opponent's clock runs out because they don't want to give you the satisfaction mating them, or they went to answer the phone, what's the difference? You win either way. Why waste so much time and energy griping and whining and moaning about it, instead of just moving on? 

    My point is that while players who are bad sports have an obvious character flaw, so do the players who complain about them. Like "I'm shocked! Shocked to find that their are players who are bad losers!" (my apologies to Captain Renault). 

     And I'm an even bigger idiot for even bothering to address this issue! As long as there are rude, inconsiderate, disrespectful schmucks playing chess online, they'll be people griping about them......

    Now, where's my copy of that Steinbeck classic, The Gripes of Wrath?

 

I don't know if it would qualify as a huge issue, but it is an issue nevertheless. And if criticizing terrible sportsmanship by shi.tty people is a character flaw you need to seriously reevaluate your criteria.

 

Most people are not shocked when people stall. They're annoyed. When Kasparov rage quit after losing he wasn't wasting a hard-working citizen's leisure time, people there at the venue were getting paid.  When Johnny Mac succumbed to pressure (which is a lot more in a professional tennis match than online chess) and threw his tantrums he didn't hurt his opponent, nor the tantrum itself stopped his opponent from advancing to next round, nor did the ump get fired or whatever. Everyone there was getting paid, except for the crowd, whose vast majority had a blast and loved watching him throw tantrums. Bad sports? Yes, but completely different context.

And still they were punished for being badsports in some form or another (or at least should have been), so why shouldn't people here be as well? For those and many other reasons the stalling report is not only welcomed but extremely necessary

I believe the reason people here should not be punished for "Stalling" is because there's simply no way to tell if someone genuinely had to go and forgot to close their game, had to answer a call, and so forth. Yes, stalling intentionally is a bit annoying but I don't really see it as an issue, because I can just open another tab and study my openings, or watch a YouTube video, and so forth.

 

Simply said I wouldn't want people to be wrongfully punished.

Kapivarovskic
melvinbluestone wrote:

    @Kapivarovskic:

      I stand corrected! Thanks.

 

=] great debate

Kapivarovskic
Mpirani wrote:
Kapivarovskic wrote:
melvinbluestone wrote:

    @Kapivarovskic:

        I agree with everything you say. I just don't understand why this is such a huge issue with so many players online. Is letting your clock run out in a lost position bad sportsmanship? Of course it is. But so what? Bad sports exist. It's part of life. Was Kasparov a bad sport when he stormed off the stage after losing to the IBM computer? Yes. How about John McEnroe when he threw all those tantrums on the tennis court? Another bad sport. They're out there. They exist. When you play chess online, there's always the possibility you may have to wait out the entire time allotted to your opponent. You know that going in. Whether your opponent's clock runs out because they don't want to give you the satisfaction mating them, or they went to answer the phone, what's the difference? You win either way. Why waste so much time and energy griping and whining and moaning about it, instead of just moving on? 

    My point is that while players who are bad sports have an obvious character flaw, so do the players who complain about them. Like "I'm shocked! Shocked to find that their are players who are bad losers!" (my apologies to Captain Renault). 

     And I'm an even bigger idiot for even bothering to address this issue! As long as there are rude, inconsiderate, disrespectful schmucks playing chess online, they'll be people griping about them......

    Now, where's my copy of that Steinbeck classic, The Gripes of Wrath?

 

I don't know if it would qualify as a huge issue, but it is an issue nevertheless. And if criticizing terrible sportsmanship by shi.tty people is a character flaw you need to seriously reevaluate your criteria.

 

Most people are not shocked when people stall. They're annoyed. When Kasparov rage quit after losing he wasn't wasting a hard-working citizen's leisure time, people there at the venue were getting paid.  When Johnny Mac succumbed to pressure (which is a lot more in a professional tennis match than online chess) and threw his tantrums he didn't hurt his opponent, nor the tantrum itself stopped his opponent from advancing to next round, nor did the ump get fired or whatever. Everyone there was getting paid, except for the crowd, whose vast majority had a blast and loved watching him throw tantrums. Bad sports? Yes, but completely different context.

And still they were punished for being badsports in some form or another (or at least should have been), so why shouldn't people here be as well? For those and many other reasons the stalling report is not only welcomed but extremely necessary

I believe the reason people here should not be punished for "Stalling" is because there's simply no way to tell if someone genuinely had to go and forgot to close their game, had to answer a call, and so forth. Yes, stalling intentionally is a bit annoying but I don't really see it as an issue, because I can just open another tab and study my openings, or watch a YouTube video, and so forth.

 

Simply said I wouldn't want people to be wrongfully punished.

 

Read my other comments, based on data analysis and pattern behavior you can estimate 99% accuracy whether it's emergency or stalling.

And when I say punish I don't mean the electric chair, but simply pairing frequent stallers only with other stallers and bad sportsmanship for an x period of time. The same as they do with people who abort too many games.

BulletMaster443

Thankfully this isn't lichess.

Vlandian_Knight
BulletMaster443 wrote:

Thankfully this isn't lichess.

Do they punish stalling or delays?

CrusaderKing1
Kapivarovskic wrote:
Mpirani wrote:
Kapivarovskic wrote:
melvinbluestone wrote:

    @Kapivarovskic:

        I agree with everything you say. I just don't understand why this is such a huge issue with so many players online. Is letting your clock run out in a lost position bad sportsmanship? Of course it is. But so what? Bad sports exist. It's part of life. Was Kasparov a bad sport when he stormed off the stage after losing to the IBM computer? Yes. How about John McEnroe when he threw all those tantrums on the tennis court? Another bad sport. They're out there. They exist. When you play chess online, there's always the possibility you may have to wait out the entire time allotted to your opponent. You know that going in. Whether your opponent's clock runs out because they don't want to give you the satisfaction mating them, or they went to answer the phone, what's the difference? You win either way. Why waste so much time and energy griping and whining and moaning about it, instead of just moving on? 

    My point is that while players who are bad sports have an obvious character flaw, so do the players who complain about them. Like "I'm shocked! Shocked to find that their are players who are bad losers!" (my apologies to Captain Renault). 

     And I'm an even bigger idiot for even bothering to address this issue! As long as there are rude, inconsiderate, disrespectful schmucks playing chess online, they'll be people griping about them......

    Now, where's my copy of that Steinbeck classic, The Gripes of Wrath?

 

I don't know if it would qualify as a huge issue, but it is an issue nevertheless. And if criticizing terrible sportsmanship by shi.tty people is a character flaw you need to seriously reevaluate your criteria.

 

Most people are not shocked when people stall. They're annoyed. When Kasparov rage quit after losing he wasn't wasting a hard-working citizen's leisure time, people there at the venue were getting paid.  When Johnny Mac succumbed to pressure (which is a lot more in a professional tennis match than online chess) and threw his tantrums he didn't hurt his opponent, nor the tantrum itself stopped his opponent from advancing to next round, nor did the ump get fired or whatever. Everyone there was getting paid, except for the crowd, whose vast majority had a blast and loved watching him throw tantrums. Bad sports? Yes, but completely different context.

And still they were punished for being badsports in some form or another (or at least should have been), so why shouldn't people here be as well? For those and many other reasons the stalling report is not only welcomed but extremely necessary

I believe the reason people here should not be punished for "Stalling" is because there's simply no way to tell if someone genuinely had to go and forgot to close their game, had to answer a call, and so forth. Yes, stalling intentionally is a bit annoying but I don't really see it as an issue, because I can just open another tab and study my openings, or watch a YouTube video, and so forth.

 

Simply said I wouldn't want people to be wrongfully punished.

 

Read my other comments, based on data analysis and pattern behavior you can estimate 99% accuracy whether it's emergency or stalling.

And when I say punish I don't mean the electric chair, but simply pairing frequent stallers only with other stallers and bad sportsmanship for an x period of time. The same as they do with people who abort too many games.

Show us the data analytics or its just speculation.

AunTheKnight
FloofyGatito wrote:

This is called sandbagging and it is ban-worthy

No, stalling is called stalling.

Kapivarovskic
CrusaderKing1 wrote:
Kapivarovskic wrote:
Mpirani wrote:
Kapivarovskic wrote:
melvinbluestone wrote:

    @Kapivarovskic:

        I agree with everything you say. I just don't understand why this is such a huge issue with so many players online. Is letting your clock run out in a lost position bad sportsmanship? Of course it is. But so what? Bad sports exist. It's part of life. Was Kasparov a bad sport when he stormed off the stage after losing to the IBM computer? Yes. How about John McEnroe when he threw all those tantrums on the tennis court? Another bad sport. They're out there. They exist. When you play chess online, there's always the possibility you may have to wait out the entire time allotted to your opponent. You know that going in. Whether your opponent's clock runs out because they don't want to give you the satisfaction mating them, or they went to answer the phone, what's the difference? You win either way. Why waste so much time and energy griping and whining and moaning about it, instead of just moving on? 

    My point is that while players who are bad sports have an obvious character flaw, so do the players who complain about them. Like "I'm shocked! Shocked to find that their are players who are bad losers!" (my apologies to Captain Renault). 

     And I'm an even bigger idiot for even bothering to address this issue! As long as there are rude, inconsiderate, disrespectful schmucks playing chess online, they'll be people griping about them......

    Now, where's my copy of that Steinbeck classic, The Gripes of Wrath?

 

I don't know if it would qualify as a huge issue, but it is an issue nevertheless. And if criticizing terrible sportsmanship by shi.tty people is a character flaw you need to seriously reevaluate your criteria.

 

Most people are not shocked when people stall. They're annoyed. When Kasparov rage quit after losing he wasn't wasting a hard-working citizen's leisure time, people there at the venue were getting paid.  When Johnny Mac succumbed to pressure (which is a lot more in a professional tennis match than online chess) and threw his tantrums he didn't hurt his opponent, nor the tantrum itself stopped his opponent from advancing to next round, nor did the ump get fired or whatever. Everyone there was getting paid, except for the crowd, whose vast majority had a blast and loved watching him throw tantrums. Bad sports? Yes, but completely different context.

And still they were punished for being badsports in some form or another (or at least should have been), so why shouldn't people here be as well? For those and many other reasons the stalling report is not only welcomed but extremely necessary

I believe the reason people here should not be punished for "Stalling" is because there's simply no way to tell if someone genuinely had to go and forgot to close their game, had to answer a call, and so forth. Yes, stalling intentionally is a bit annoying but I don't really see it as an issue, because I can just open another tab and study my openings, or watch a YouTube video, and so forth.

 

Simply said I wouldn't want people to be wrongfully punished.

 

Read my other comments, based on data analysis and pattern behavior you can estimate 99% accuracy whether it's emergency or stalling.

And when I say punish I don't mean the electric chair, but simply pairing frequent stallers only with other stallers and bad sportsmanship for an x period of time. The same as they do with people who abort too many games.

Show us the data analytics or its just speculation.

 

Lmao are you trolling or you just didn't finish high school? Because if you didn't, it's understandable why you your interpretation and debating skills are so baffling. Either way, as I said, if you study the basics of statistics and data analysis you'll learn that with a large enough sample, and following the right procedures,  you can estimate anything with extremely high accuracy (for example, all else equal, the more games a player has the easier it is for the algorithm to determine if it's cheating or not) and that's a fact, not speculation as you so desperately tried to argue. But you pick and choose what to reply to and what to ignore when you don't have a valid and logical reply in a vain attempt to try and distort reality to fit in your delusional narrative where "stalling is ok and it's impossible to determine whether people are stalling or not.". Now, I am not one that likes using terms such as losing and winning in a discussion like this, but in this case you just confirmed what I suspected from the beginning: it's clear as day you're a staller. And you're proud of that, which makes it worse. The evidence here abundantly and clearly indicates that your stalling skills come into play whenever in a losing position, which you're doing here in this forum,  as you admittedly do in lost positions on a chess board. For instance, instead of replying to my post where I showed the diagrams and addressing what I asked and argued there, you demand data that you know only chess.com has access to, claiming if I don't have chess.com data I am speculating when anybody who did the least bit of research knows how statistics work and how easy is to estimate with extremely high accuracy based on data analysis and pattern behavior . So I am just no longer going to follow this thread and I'll to stop wasting my time since that's your goal when you're obviously not interested in understanding what is stalling and why stalling is considered poor etiquette/bad sportsmanship and how the report/procedure to determin stalling works... you just want to convince yourself and others that stalling is okay. Now the reason for that is beyond me, that's for your therapist to say... but my educated guess? Frustration with something that you're trying to overcompensate. Peace and good luck with your chess. I'm out

bishoppairchess
Kapivarovskic wrote:
CrusaderKing1 wrote:
Kapivarovskic wrote:
Mpirani wrote:
Kapivarovskic wrote:
melvinbluestone wrote:

    @Kapivarovskic:

        I agree with everything you say. I just don't understand why this is such a huge issue with so many players online. Is letting your clock run out in a lost position bad sportsmanship? Of course it is. But so what? Bad sports exist. It's part of life. Was Kasparov a bad sport when he stormed off the stage after losing to the IBM computer? Yes. How about John McEnroe when he threw all those tantrums on the tennis court? Another bad sport. They're out there. They exist. When you play chess online, there's always the possibility you may have to wait out the entire time allotted to your opponent. You know that going in. Whether your opponent's clock runs out because they don't want to give you the satisfaction mating them, or they went to answer the phone, what's the difference? You win either way. Why waste so much time and energy griping and whining and moaning about it, instead of just moving on? 

    My point is that while players who are bad sports have an obvious character flaw, so do the players who complain about them. Like "I'm shocked! Shocked to find that their are players who are bad losers!" (my apologies to Captain Renault). 

     And I'm an even bigger idiot for even bothering to address this issue! As long as there are rude, inconsiderate, disrespectful schmucks playing chess online, they'll be people griping about them......

    Now, where's my copy of that Steinbeck classic, The Gripes of Wrath?

 

I don't know if it would qualify as a huge issue, but it is an issue nevertheless. And if criticizing terrible sportsmanship by shi.tty people is a character flaw you need to seriously reevaluate your criteria.

 

Most people are not shocked when people stall. They're annoyed. When Kasparov rage quit after losing he wasn't wasting a hard-working citizen's leisure time, people there at the venue were getting paid.  When Johnny Mac succumbed to pressure (which is a lot more in a professional tennis match than online chess) and threw his tantrums he didn't hurt his opponent, nor the tantrum itself stopped his opponent from advancing to next round, nor did the ump get fired or whatever. Everyone there was getting paid, except for the crowd, whose vast majority had a blast and loved watching him throw tantrums. Bad sports? Yes, but completely different context.

And still they were punished for being badsports in some form or another (or at least should have been), so why shouldn't people here be as well? For those and many other reasons the stalling report is not only welcomed but extremely necessary

I believe the reason people here should not be punished for "Stalling" is because there's simply no way to tell if someone genuinely had to go and forgot to close their game, had to answer a call, and so forth. Yes, stalling intentionally is a bit annoying but I don't really see it as an issue, because I can just open another tab and study my openings, or watch a YouTube video, and so forth.

 

Simply said I wouldn't want people to be wrongfully punished.

 

Read my other comments, based on data analysis and pattern behavior you can estimate 99% accuracy whether it's emergency or stalling.

And when I say punish I don't mean the electric chair, but simply pairing frequent stallers only with other stallers and bad sportsmanship for an x period of time. The same as they do with people who abort too many games.

Show us the data analytics or its just speculation.

 

Lmao are you trolling or you just didn't finish high school? Because if you didn't, it's understandable why you your interpretation and debating skills are so baffling. Either way, as I said, if you study the basics of statistics and data analysis you'll learn that with a large enough sample, and following the right procedures,  you can estimate anything with extremely high accuracy (for example, all else equal, the more games a player has the easier it is for the algorithm to determine if it's cheating or not) and that's a fact, not speculation as you so desperately tried to argue. But you pick and choose what to reply to and what to ignore when you don't have a valid and logical reply in a vain attempt to try and distort reality to fit in your delusional narrative where "stalling is ok and it's impossible to determine whether people are stalling or not.". Now, I am not one that likes using terms such as losing and winning in a discussion like this, but in this case you just confirmed what I suspected from the beginning: it's clear as day you're a staller. And you're proud of that, which makes it worse. The evidence here abundantly and clearly indicates that your stalling skills come into play whenever in a losing position, which you're doing here in this forum,  as you admittedly do in lost positions on a chess board. For instance, instead of replying to my post where I showed the diagrams and addressing what I asked and argued there, you demand data that you know only chess.com has access to, claiming if I don't have chess.com data I am speculating when anybody who did the least bit of research knows how statistics work and how easy is to estimate with extremely high accuracy based on data analysis and pattern behavior . So I am just no longer going to follow this thread and I'll to stop wasting my time since that's your goal when you're obviously not interested in understanding what is stalling and why stalling is considered poor etiquette/bad sportsmanship and how the report/procedure to determin stalling works... you just want to convince yourself and others that stalling is okay. Now the reason for that is beyond me, that's for your therapist to say... but my educated guess? Frustration with something that you're trying to overcompensate. Peace and good luck with your chess. I'm out

+1

Good post. The only people arguing stalling are probably the ones guilty of doing it. It's a schmuck move and trying to convince us that it is anything else is absurd. 

theendgame3
Kapivarovskic wrote:
CrusaderKing1 wrote:
Kapivarovskic wrote:
Mpirani wrote:
Kapivarovskic wrote:
melvinbluestone wrote:

    @Kapivarovskic:

        I agree with everything you say. I just don't understand why this is such a huge issue with so many players online. Is letting your clock run out in a lost position bad sportsmanship? Of course it is. But so what? Bad sports exist. It's part of life. Was Kasparov a bad sport when he stormed off the stage after losing to the IBM computer? Yes. How about John McEnroe when he threw all those tantrums on the tennis court? Another bad sport. They're out there. They exist. When you play chess online, there's always the possibility you may have to wait out the entire time allotted to your opponent. You know that going in. Whether your opponent's clock runs out because they don't want to give you the satisfaction mating them, or they went to answer the phone, what's the difference? You win either way. Why waste so much time and energy griping and whining and moaning about it, instead of just moving on? 

    My point is that while players who are bad sports have an obvious character flaw, so do the players who complain about them. Like "I'm shocked! Shocked to find that their are players who are bad losers!" (my apologies to Captain Renault). 

     And I'm an even bigger idiot for even bothering to address this issue! As long as there are rude, inconsiderate, disrespectful schmucks playing chess online, they'll be people griping about them......

    Now, where's my copy of that Steinbeck classic, The Gripes of Wrath?

 

I don't know if it would qualify as a huge issue, but it is an issue nevertheless. And if criticizing terrible sportsmanship by shi.tty people is a character flaw you need to seriously reevaluate your criteria.

 

Most people are not shocked when people stall. They're annoyed. When Kasparov rage quit after losing he wasn't wasting a hard-working citizen's leisure time, people there at the venue were getting paid.  When Johnny Mac succumbed to pressure (which is a lot more in a professional tennis match than online chess) and threw his tantrums he didn't hurt his opponent, nor the tantrum itself stopped his opponent from advancing to next round, nor did the ump get fired or whatever. Everyone there was getting paid, except for the crowd, whose vast majority had a blast and loved watching him throw tantrums. Bad sports? Yes, but completely different context.

And still they were punished for being badsports in some form or another (or at least should have been), so why shouldn't people here be as well? For those and many other reasons the stalling report is not only welcomed but extremely necessary

I believe the reason people here should not be punished for "Stalling" is because there's simply no way to tell if someone genuinely had to go and forgot to close their game, had to answer a call, and so forth. Yes, stalling intentionally is a bit annoying but I don't really see it as an issue, because I can just open another tab and study my openings, or watch a YouTube video, and so forth.

 

Simply said I wouldn't want people to be wrongfully punished.

 

Read my other comments, based on data analysis and pattern behavior you can estimate 99% accuracy whether it's emergency or stalling.

And when I say punish I don't mean the electric chair, but simply pairing frequent stallers only with other stallers and bad sportsmanship for an x period of time. The same as they do with people who abort too many games.

Show us the data analytics or its just speculation.

 

Lmao are you trolling or you just didn't finish high school? Because if you didn't, it's understandable why you your interpretation and debating skills are so baffling. Either way, as I said, if you study the basics of statistics and data analysis you'll learn that with a large enough sample, and following the right procedures,  you can estimate anything with extremely high accuracy (for example, all else equal, the more games a player has the easier it is for the algorithm to determine if it's cheating or not) and that's a fact, not speculation as you so desperately tried to argue. But you pick and choose what to reply to and what to ignore when you don't have a valid and logical reply in a vain attempt to try and distort reality to fit in your delusional narrative where "stalling is ok and it's impossible to determine whether people are stalling or not.". Now, I am not one that likes using terms such as losing and winning in a discussion like this, but in this case you just confirmed what I suspected from the beginning: it's clear as day you're a staller. And you're proud of that, which makes it worse. The evidence here abundantly and clearly indicates that your stalling skills come into play whenever in a losing position, which you're doing here in this forum,  as you admittedly do in lost positions on a chess board. For instance, instead of replying to my post where I showed the diagrams and addressing what I asked and argued there, you demand data that you know only chess.com has access to, claiming if I don't have chess.com data I am speculating when anybody who did the least bit of research knows how statistics work and how easy is to estimate with extremely high accuracy based on data analysis and pattern behavior . So I am just no longer going to follow this thread and I'll to stop wasting my time since that's your goal when you're obviously not interested in understanding what is stalling and why stalling is considered poor etiquette/bad sportsmanship and how the report/procedure to determin stalling works... you just want to convince yourself and others that stalling is okay. Now the reason for that is beyond me, that's for your therapist to say... but my educated guess? Frustration with something that you're trying to overcompensate. Peace and good luck with your chess. I'm out

well done in winning 'Rant of the Year'.

CrusaderKing1
Kapivarovskic wrote:
CrusaderKing1 wrote:
Kapivarovskic wrote:
Mpirani wrote:
Kapivarovskic wrote:
melvinbluestone wrote:

    @Kapivarovskic:

        I agree with everything you say. I just don't understand why this is such a huge issue with so many players online. Is letting your clock run out in a lost position bad sportsmanship? Of course it is. But so what? Bad sports exist. It's part of life. Was Kasparov a bad sport when he stormed off the stage after losing to the IBM computer? Yes. How about John McEnroe when he threw all those tantrums on the tennis court? Another bad sport. They're out there. They exist. When you play chess online, there's always the possibility you may have to wait out the entire time allotted to your opponent. You know that going in. Whether your opponent's clock runs out because they don't want to give you the satisfaction mating them, or they went to answer the phone, what's the difference? You win either way. Why waste so much time and energy griping and whining and moaning about it, instead of just moving on? 

    My point is that while players who are bad sports have an obvious character flaw, so do the players who complain about them. Like "I'm shocked! Shocked to find that their are players who are bad losers!" (my apologies to Captain Renault). 

     And I'm an even bigger idiot for even bothering to address this issue! As long as there are rude, inconsiderate, disrespectful schmucks playing chess online, they'll be people griping about them......

    Now, where's my copy of that Steinbeck classic, The Gripes of Wrath?

 

I don't know if it would qualify as a huge issue, but it is an issue nevertheless. And if criticizing terrible sportsmanship by shi.tty people is a character flaw you need to seriously reevaluate your criteria.

 

Most people are not shocked when people stall. They're annoyed. When Kasparov rage quit after losing he wasn't wasting a hard-working citizen's leisure time, people there at the venue were getting paid.  When Johnny Mac succumbed to pressure (which is a lot more in a professional tennis match than online chess) and threw his tantrums he didn't hurt his opponent, nor the tantrum itself stopped his opponent from advancing to next round, nor did the ump get fired or whatever. Everyone there was getting paid, except for the crowd, whose vast majority had a blast and loved watching him throw tantrums. Bad sports? Yes, but completely different context.

And still they were punished for being badsports in some form or another (or at least should have been), so why shouldn't people here be as well? For those and many other reasons the stalling report is not only welcomed but extremely necessary

I believe the reason people here should not be punished for "Stalling" is because there's simply no way to tell if someone genuinely had to go and forgot to close their game, had to answer a call, and so forth. Yes, stalling intentionally is a bit annoying but I don't really see it as an issue, because I can just open another tab and study my openings, or watch a YouTube video, and so forth.

 

Simply said I wouldn't want people to be wrongfully punished.

 

Read my other comments, based on data analysis and pattern behavior you can estimate 99% accuracy whether it's emergency or stalling.

And when I say punish I don't mean the electric chair, but simply pairing frequent stallers only with other stallers and bad sportsmanship for an x period of time. The same as they do with people who abort too many games.

Show us the data analytics or its just speculation.

 

Lmao are you trolling or you just didn't finish high school? Because if you didn't, it's understandable why you your interpretation and debating skills are so baffling. Either way, as I said, if you study the basics of statistics and data analysis you'll learn that with a large enough sample, and following the right procedures,  you can estimate anything with extremely high accuracy (for example, all else equal, the more games a player has the easier it is for the algorithm to determine if it's cheating or not) and that's a fact, not speculation as you so desperately tried to argue. But you pick and choose what to reply to and what to ignore when you don't have a valid and logical reply in a vain attempt to try and distort reality to fit in your delusional narrative where "stalling is ok and it's impossible to determine whether people are stalling or not.". Now, I am not one that likes using terms such as losing and winning in a discussion like this, but in this case you just confirmed what I suspected from the beginning: it's clear as day you're a staller. And you're proud of that, which makes it worse. The evidence here abundantly and clearly indicates that your stalling skills come into play whenever in a losing position, which you're doing here in this forum,  as you admittedly do in lost positions on a chess board. For instance, instead of replying to my post where I showed the diagrams and addressing what I asked and argued there, you demand data that you know only chess.com has access to, claiming if I don't have chess.com data I am speculating when anybody who did the least bit of research knows how statistics work and how easy is to estimate with extremely high accuracy based on data analysis and pattern behavior . So I am just no longer going to follow this thread and I'll to stop wasting my time since that's your goal when you're obviously not interested in understanding what is stalling and why stalling is considered poor etiquette/bad sportsmanship and how the report/procedure to determin stalling works... you just want to convince yourself and others that stalling is okay. Now the reason for that is beyond me, that's for your therapist to say... but my educated guess? Frustration with something that you're trying to overcompensate. Peace and good luck with your chess. I'm out

I have a bachelors in chemistry, masters in chemistry, and took statistics courses throughout those degrees, and also went to medical school. Lets not get education involved. You might lose.

Again, give me a sample of data analytics showing that chess.com with 99%+ accuracy can tell someone is purposely stalling enough to be banned. It might exist, but you are saying it does out of speculation.

 

BulletMaster443
Vlandian_Knight wrote:
BulletMaster443 wrote:

Thankfully this isn't lichess.

Do they punish stalling or delays?

 

To put it simply. No - they don't.

The game doesn't autoresign. You can literally run your time to 1 second, make a move, and then resign. Lichess should really fix this.

zes0460

Someone once did that to me and i was in a talkitive mood.. and i started to talk since we had a lot time to burn.. suprisingly they didn't close the chat.

And i started to tell my thoughts about stalling people's mindset, my own psychoanalsis of their insecurities.. like why they do this, what they actually want and failed to achieve.. well, i wrote many things.. slowly, nicely.. with no aggression.. and they all listened in silence.

Then they said sorry and resigned lol..