melvinbluestone wrote:
@Kapivarovskic:
I stand corrected! Thanks.
=] great debate
Stalling/quitting games… I just sat here and waited for someone to let the clock run out…
Sort:
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 wrote:
Thankfully this isn't lichess.
Do they punish stalling or delays?
Aug 2, 2021
0
#66
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.
Aug 2, 2021
0
#67
FloofyGatito wrote:
This is called sandbagging and it is ban-worthy
No, stalling is called stalling.
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
Aug 3, 2021
0
#69
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.
Aug 3, 2021
0
#70
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.
Aug 3, 2021
0
#71
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.
Aug 3, 2021
0
#72
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..
Feb 5, 2022
0
#73
I just cornered some guy (?) and had to sit there waiting for three minutes for this person to make a move--which they made two seconds before their time ran out.
I've encountered this a lot--the whole, make a move in the last 2 seconds after making me wait for 5 minutes or more sort of thing. It seems to be a tactic people who are not chess players use to win games because they realize that they are not chess players and cannot win a game without resorting to underhanded tactics. The logic, I suppose, is hoping your opponent will tab away to another window when it becomes apparent you're not going to move, then to quickly come back at the end and make a move, hoping they'll have forgotten the game--then it will be THEIR time that runs out.
Anyway, it's just extremely sad some people do this.
Feb 5, 2022
0
#74
I realize that you're not referring to daily games but....with a 3 day time limit, an opponent ALWAYS goes down to the last hour. Even on early moves where a lot of thinking is not required. Although the opponent is within his rights, such stalling is terribly frustrating. It really shouldn't take months to play a game.
I once waited 15 minutes for this guy to move because any move he made me would’ve set him in checkmate
eliothowell wrote:
I realize that you're not referring to daily games but....with a 3 day time limit, an opponent ALWAYS goes down to the last hour. Even on early moves where a lot of thinking is not required. Although the opponent is within his rights, such stalling is terribly frustrating. It really shouldn't take months to play a game.
Except usually on my daily games I play each on a 12 hour period, play when I wake up, and when I’m going to sleep so I can stay on track with all my 100 games… by doing this I usually go down to the last 10 hours or so.
Feb 5, 2022
0
#78
this is why i play time controls like 3/5 or 2/1 rather than 10/0.
@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.