timers



I lost a game in which I could have won if only I hadn't lost my queen. Who is in favour of having an adudicator to look at games to determine if we should be given our queens back. I think that would be fair.
Time's a part of the game, gateman.


I would like to reintroduce my extend button idea:
http://www.chess.com/forum/view/community/winning-on-time
It is my opinion that time management in blitz and correspondance chess are different. In blitz it is part of the core rules and managing time is part of the win criteria.
In correspondance chess the 3 day time period is designed to make sure games end sometime, even if the opponent stops coming to the site.
However, sometimes you time-out because something is happening in your real life, and you are not able to log in. My suggestion then was to allow the opponent to extend the time if he wants to do so, allowing you not to miss out on a lot of exciting matches.

Reb> What is an adudicator?
What, a player of your calibre has never had a game abudicated by an abudicator??

Reb> What is an adudicator?
What, a player of your calibre has never had a game abudicated by an abudicator??
I don't believe in abudication!

i was recently playing a game, against a player that i probaly could have beat, but i ran out of time and when i loged into chess.com it was probaly only by an hour that i had ran out of time, it was a three day timer, but who is in favour of having an adudicator to look at games that have run out of time and say wether they should be given more time to continue games, or if there is no point in continuing. i think this would be more fair.