also for paddy's day
This is getting ridiculous

also for paddy's day
(can anyone name the site? this isn't my pic but i've been here)
No, but it looks mountainously Mourne-ful.
Someone made the comment that chess and sports aren't the same because you don't lose players. I suppose those that say that have never heard of basketball, when you foul out. Or hockey when you go to the penalty box. Also I don't know how many times I have seen on this website people showing proof and websites that by definition chess is a sport.

"Someone made the comment that chess and sports aren't the same because you don't lose players. I suppose those that say that have never heard of basketball, when you foul out. Or hockey when you go to the penalty box."
JediMaster I don't understand, "lose players?" In basketball and hockey you DO lose players, and in chess you don't, so thats a difference. So wheres the linking there between them being similar?
As far as chess goes, it IS a sport by definition.
If any of these people behaved the same way in a club, no one would want to play against them, but they can just get away with it on the internet.
You're joking right? I know a lot of people who will play right up until mate is due. Nobody avoids playing them. In fact, I myself have played on awhile in some situations which were objectively completely lost. If someone thinks I might slip up and give them back the game, then fair play to them.
At my club, we have 2 hours each for the game. If you're dead lost and you continue playing until your time runs out, this would frustrate your opponent to the extreme, lead the other players who pass by to ridicule you for your pointless behaviour, and you could bet that no one would be eager to play a skittles game against you afterwards if they expect that you'll drag it out if you lose. Ever tried it?
I'm willing to bet that I'm spending over 50% of my time on live chess playing out positions that are already clearly won.
Someone should have taken you up on your bet; You have lost 55% of your blitz (3% draws) and 50% of your bullet (3% draws).
The games I lose don't take that long because I resign them, Gadget.
What's bugging me the most is that these games are played for fun. I could imagine playing on in a serious game hoping for a swindle because you could save your standing in a competition, but here there's nothing on the line and playing on isn't fun for the winner nor for the loser.
Just recently I had to wait for 12 minutes, to win in the following position playing as white. I have played 823 "Live Chess - Long" games up to now and this is the second time this happened. I have to note that in both cases both me and my opponent were at the 1300s. I guess it is because at that level one considers himself a solid player who cannot possibly suffer an intimidating loss. It's just against common sense!
(The continuation would be 1...Kd7 2.Rd1+ Bd2 3.RxB#

I'm willing to bet that I'm spending over 50% of my time on live chess playing out positions that are already clearly won.
Someone should have taken you up on your bet; You have lost 55% of your blitz (3% draws) and 50% of your bullet (3% draws).
The games I lose don't take that long because I resign them, Gadget.
You know, I think maybe I did misread what you were claiming in that sentence. Sorry about that.

What's bugging me the most is that these games are played for fun. I could imagine playing on in a serious game hoping for a swindle because you could save your standing in a competition, but here there's nothing on the line and playing on isn't fun for the winner nor for the loser.
Well, maybe some people want their games to be tough fights as that is part of what chess is. Some players who do not play in tournaments may need to rely on these games as their loose measurements of skill; you cannot really speak for everyone as to why and how they want to play here.
[Images larger than 600x600 cause problems, especially for mobile devices.
Deleted by Moderator]
for paddy's day