I think there is lots that you haven't thought of in this proposal:
a) Suppose that I think it may be a decent idea to allow takebacks in some instances so I allow it on my profile. Then I'm playing a silly game where I am up two pieces and a rook and my opponent asks for takeback. I decline because I just want the game over. I'm going to get worse invective than if the site just allowed takebacks because now I have said that I accept takebacks, just not from you.
b) Suppose that in this weird way, I allow a takeback and the game is won by me but then it gets boring. Do I resign to get out of the game? Do we need another button that says "Quit boring won game".
c) Who would play their best chess knowing that the game is already officially won?
b) Just resign it, if it bores you - it will be unrated by that point...
c) Many people would play even better - due to the lack of stress...
Here_is_plenty wrote "I am stunned that takebacks exist. I thought they were consigned to when 8 year olds play ..."
I agree. The takeback idea is for small children. Perhaps there should be a chess.children.com website for little kids and childish adults who want to take back moves.
There is one, it's called ICC. Funny thing, even Nakamura bothers to play with lots of other GM children there...
I bet Nakamura and the other GM's never do takebacks.
No - but for some peculiar reason, and, obviously unaware of your objections, ICC does provide the take-back as a standard option...
Actually chess.com does have take-back games. It is one of the options when you create a game request. I've never asked for a take-back and I never accept take-back requests when I play on another chess site, but in some cirucmstances it's totally reasonable to have take-backs - for example, you're playing a low-key unrated game with a friend - what's the problem there?
Does Nakamura take back moves?
I didn't think so.
Five year olds and dishonorable childish adults who don't care about their reputation will say "can I take that move back?"
"Can I take that move back" really means "I lost but I want to throw out the rules of chess so I can win."
"I blundered and lost, and we can record the game that way, but it was an interesting position before I blundered and I'm wondering if you'd be interested in playing it out with me as an unrated game."
Try to be a little more open minded.
If you can take back one move, Why not have all moves be able'd to be took back.
Now this feature already exists. It's called "Request Rematch".
Has anyone considered there is a huge difference in moving a piece to the wrong square in a real life OTB game (where you move the piece with your hand) and sliding an icon with a mouse or touch pad on the computer?
I would give (or ask for a takeback) only if castling was intended and the king drops one square short or an obvious takeback was intended but the taking piece droped one sqaure short. Other than that -- too bad.
No, but for some peculiar reason, and obviously unaware of your objections, ICC does provides the take-back as a standard option...
Why would you say that? I never said anything like "A site that implements these must be oblivious to the following objections" or anything remotely resembling that. ICC probably did it fully aware of my objections which continue to be valid despite ICC's implementation of takebacks. Presumably ICC did it because they feel that the advanatges ourweigh the disadvantages.
If your argument is something like ICC implemented it so chess.com should as well, I think that is a silly argument.
You are right; an argument should stand on its own merits and not invoke anyone’s authority. But what started out as a simple suggestion degenerated at some point to troll crossfire. If something I said came out smug or upset you, I apologize.
Still, the point remains and it is a simple one: If the addition of a feature is useful to some people (not all of them “five year olds and dishonorable childish adults…”, as a member opined right after your comment above) and at the same time anyone who dislikes this option can ignore it altogether, I can see no harm in it - only a net gain for the community.
not a fan of tackbacks, learned a lot by playing against a good player. who demanded no tackback. Think before moving is the lesson.it really hurt to have a winning advantage and suddenly make a blunder.
a painful experience that teaches you to sit on the fingers one moment longer cause you do not want to lose the advantage. Knowing one bad move is not enough.I think people in tourments that say " if they had made that move they would have won"...I think they have trained to much with tackbacks.
Still, the point remains and it is a simple one: If the addition of a feature is useful to some and at the same time anyone who dislikes it can ignore it altogether, there is no harm in it - only a net gain for the community...
Here is something I have done twice and have not asked for a takeback:
In this case, few would blame you... :)
People have different problems and this sometimes affects their on line quick chess. I am always sleepy and have been known to drop off to sleep
even during a quick game nd then my play is bad and I even hang queens and rooks etc. But then I resign and say thanks for the game. While takeback is ok for some, it is not really needed.
I don't like takebacks at all. This feature should not be made a part of this site because once on another site someone demanded a takeback and I didn't want to give it to him and I could not leave the game without losing points so I had to give it to him. I have found that a good mouse, especially an optical mouse, and good computer components will prevent slips and accidents. Of course if you do something stupid, you deserve to lose, let it be a lesson to you. Once burned twice shy! "'Tis kind to be cruel."
I'm not sure how I feel about take backs here. The fact that the option only exists in an unrated game and is clear as a part of the accepted rules between only two players doesn't seem to cause any issues for me. I don't see the problem in simply declining a game request that has takebacks and telling the person that this is the reason for declining.
I regularly play chess with a friend and we allow takebacks with each other, but only (as some here have said) because it is during such an interesting game and we would rather play it out. Of course once the game has ended there is a little light hearted banter over who won, but it's not like we're playing for sheep stations, so we are both just happy for the games.
Mouse slips are a reality, and mosy players don't want to win a game because your opponent made an obvious mouse slip. BUT, sometimes it's not so obvious and if your opponent requests a takeback you might look like a jerk if you say no. I think they should be added and can be used a maximum of 1 time per game by each player if approved by your opponent.
And what happens if you disagree with your opponent using it because u suspect he's simply trying to back track on a stupid move?