If your not in the mood for the London System, shut it down on the first move and play for tactics:
https://www.chess.com/game/live/42096519519
https://www.chess.com/game/live/36736772221
https://www.chess.com/game/live/42444598695
Unethical chess players - a discussion
Sort:
Also, specifically against the London and the Stafford, like, just spend half an hour learning one line. The London is easily equalizing for black, just learn one line that equalizes. The Stafford, take it, and then play e5/d4. Or dodge the Stafford by playing the Steinitz (3. d4). Like PawnTsunami said, a lot of attempted traps are just bad if the trap doesn't work. So just... learn to see opening traps, and don't get hit by them. Alternatively, just get hit by them, and then remember them so you don't get hit by them next time.
Aug 8, 2022
0
#24
If I’m in a losing position and can draw by repetition, I will. The clock is also a piece. If I can win on time by making my position more complicated, I will. I’m not a trap player, but I do find myself looking up how to negate them. Super annoying. It’s usually giving up a rook for a knight and bishop. It equals out.
There are strategies against the London these days.
The biggest frustration is when I go up against an obvious cheater followed by a trap/tricks player. I then stop and go play at Lichess, where I still run into trap/tricks players. It’s the game. It’s why you hear GMs say they play differently based on rating.
There are strategies against the London these days.
The biggest frustration is when I go up against an obvious cheater followed by a trap/tricks player. I then stop and go play at Lichess, where I still run into trap/tricks players. It’s the game. It’s why you hear GMs say they play differently based on rating.
Aug 8, 2022
0
#25
busterlark wrote:
Also, specifically against the London and the Stafford, like, just spend half an hour learning one line. The London is easily equalizing for black, just learn one line that equalizes. The Stafford, take it, and then play e5/d4. Or dodge the Stafford by playing the Steinitz (3. d4). Like PawnTsunami said, a lot of attempted traps are just bad if the trap doesn't work. So just... learn to see opening traps, and don't get hit by them. Alternatively, just get hit by them, and then remember them so you don't get hit by them next time.
But there are hundreds of traps, how can you possibly learn them all?
I play both Nf6 and d5 vs d4 when they play London I play 2C5 vs both and it seems to work wonders for me I like when people play it.
Well you shouldn’t be playing that many different openings that you can get caught with all. And you don’t need to memorize them. Just play solidly and calculate.
Aug 8, 2022
0
#29
I believe playing an illegal move otb is allowed, but if your opponent sees it then you lose the game on the spot.
Aug 8, 2022
0
#30
PatrickHockstetter wrote:
busterlark wrote:
Also, specifically against the London and the Stafford, like, just spend half an hour learning one line. The London is easily equalizing for black, just learn one line that equalizes. The Stafford, take it, and then play e5/d4. Or dodge the Stafford by playing the Steinitz (3. d4). Like PawnTsunami said, a lot of attempted traps are just bad if the trap doesn't work. So just... learn to see opening traps, and don't get hit by them. Alternatively, just get hit by them, and then remember them so you don't get hit by them next time.
But there are hundreds of traps, how can you possibly learn them all?
It’s called an opening repertoire.
Additionally, traps are almost always tactics based. If you can recognize certain patterns (“oh, my rook x rays his queen!”) you should be able to avoid them.
Aug 8, 2022
0
#31
NMRhino wrote:
I believe playing an illegal move otb is allowed, but if your opponent sees it then you lose the game on the spot.
I'd have to look up the FIDE rules, but the USCF rules state that the first time your opponent gets 2 minutes added to the clock (in a classical game - you do lose on the spot in a blitz game), and the second time the game is forfeited.
Aug 8, 2022
0
#32
1-2. Turn off your chat. Problem solved.
3. You seem confused. If they run down thieir clock just to stall, that's poor behavior and should be reported. But they lose, not you. If *you* run down your clock, then yes, you lose. Just don't pretend they're the ones who did it.
4. There's no such thing as a "repetition stalemate," but assuming you mean "draw by repetition": if they have a draw by repetition available to them, then they don't, by a definition, have a losing position. If they did have a losing position and you allowed them a repetition, then that's your mistake. Always a good one to learn from.
5. Yes, this is poor sportsmanship. Offhand, I can't recall a single time I've had it happen against me. Probably it has, but it's quite rare.
6. Hahahahahaha!
7. It goes both ways. You have to play in a way that allows people to work traps. Slow down and look for what threats they may have.
8. It takes quite an imagination to describe asking for a rematch as "bullying behavior." (Have you ever witnessed *actual* bullying behavior???) Hint: they *asked* if you wanted a rematch. They did not demand one. Unless they have mastered inter-computer hypnotism, then they did not force one. You are allowed to say no or yes as you please.
OTB:
1. I hope you objected and, if necessary, had the TD intervene. They can go through the game with you and establish whether the move was illegal. To the best of my knowledge, in the thousands of OTB games I've taken part in or watched, I've never witnessed an illegal move played intentionally as some sort of trick. (Caveat: I can think of one youtube video where street hustler tries this. Have you been playing with street hustlers lately?)
2. Something else I've never witnessed in thousands of OTB games I've witnessed. I hope you're aware that a TD can also adjudicate such matters.
3. Kids sometimes do the play-with-one-hand-and-hit-the-clock-with-the-other thing. It's annoying, though I assume they don't know better and need to have the rule explained to them. You're always welcome to tell them they can't, or have a TD do so. Highly uncommon otherwise.
4. Sure, Anatoly, sure. (And to make it worse, they wear *sunglasses*!)
Aug 8, 2022
0
#33
tlay80 wrote:
OTB:
1. I hope you objected and, if necessary, had the TD intervene. They can go through the game with you and establish whether the move was illegal. To the best of my knowledge, in the thousands of OTB games I've taken part in or watched, I've never witnessed an illegal move played intentionally as some sort of trick.
As an aside here, there was a kid who tried this at the World Rapid & Blitz tournament against Magnus a few years ago. He made an illegal move, Magnus didn't call him on it and made a move (Magnus was completely winning). The kid then called the arbiter over and said that since his move was illegal, Magnus' move was then illegal and he would like to claim the win. Obviously, that did not stand.
That said, it is not common and even the attempt was frowned upon by the whole chess community.
Aug 8, 2022
0
#34
PawnTsunami wrote:
tlay80 wrote:
OTB:
1. I hope you objected and, if necessary, had the TD intervene. They can go through the game with you and establish whether the move was illegal. To the best of my knowledge, in the thousands of OTB games I've taken part in or watched, I've never witnessed an illegal move played intentionally as some sort of trick.
As an aside here, there was a kid who tried this at the World Rapid & Blitz tournament against Magnus a few years ago. He made an illegal move, Magnus didn't call him on it and made a move (Magnus was completely winning). The kid then called the arbiter over and said that since his move was illegal, Magnus' move was then illegal and he would like to claim the win. Obviously, that did not stand.
That said, it is not common and even the attempt was frowned upon by the whole chess community.
Oh, you’re right! I’d forgotten that bit.
Many of the things the OP is describing have indeed happened at one point or another. But I don’t think he has a clue how rare they are.
Aug 8, 2022
0
#35
I'm struggling to understand why you're complaining about falling into opening traps. If you want to improve then you need to learn to deal with them however you choose to play Chess. These players are teaching you to do that. If you think a player is overrated because they play traps then all you need to do is avoid the traps and then beat them on tactics in the mid or end game. This is a win-win situation for you, even if you do lose rating each time you fall into a trap which you can't recover from. The fundamental problem here seems to be that you want a higher rating without being able to beat higher rated players. If you got that you'd lose with greater certainty to even better players. Try to view your rating as a measure of how much you've learned rather than a status symbol and every loss as a learning opportunity. Very few of us are as good as we'd like to be. That's just Chess.
Aug 8, 2022
0
#36
tlay80 wrote:
Many of the things the OP is describing have indeed happened at one point or another. But I don’t think he has a clue how rare they are.
Very rare, even when dealing with fairly young kids. They happen from time to time, but are not common and almost always corrected by an arbiter.
You never ever ask for takebacks. The very idea of them is disgusting. If you make a mistake you thank your opponent for the game and give up. It is as simple as that.
A lost game is really better than a won game because it gives you an incentive to learn from your mistakes
Aug 8, 2022
0
#38
PatrickHockstetter wrote:
*Snip* why does chess seem to attract so many pathetic, insecure nerds whose only vain desire is to win games, at the expense of all sportsmanship and comradery? I have played football, tennis, Warhammer, Catan, etc, and I have never seen such displays of awful behaviour. What is it about winning a chess game which becomes these player's narcissistic addiction?
Perhaps you've put chess on a pedestal and you don't see or mind the same behavior in other games/sports. Haven't you seen fouls, fights, doping etc?
Aug 8, 2022
0
#39
PatrickHockstetter wrote:
In just a few months, on this website and lichess.org I have seen players who:
- Ask for takebacks, but refuse to accept takebacks from the other player (I would assume a 1:1 is the most ethical way to approach this but many players just use the takeback feature to gain an advantage)
- Ask for a takeback when they have blundered a major piece in order to not lose the game, then proceed to win the game.
- Run down the clock despite being in a losing position in order to win on time.
- Force the other player to reach a repetition stalemate despite being in a losing position. Usually this is followed up by me trying to break the repetition and then losing the game.
- Abort the game as black if they see an opening they do not like.
- Play the London System because they know it will lead to a advantageous position, this puts Black at a massive disadvantage every single game.
- Practice a set of rehearsed trap openings designed to win quickly and move up the ratings ladder. These players have no sense of learning chess properly, they just have a repertoire of traps which they have memorised/written down and employ them every single game. E.g. they will play the Stafford Gambit over and over again. Or a Vienna trap they saw on Youtube. This means that beating those players requires also memorising a lot of opening traps in order to avoid them, this is a major barrier to increasing rating as you will come across Youtube-guided trap players a lot before 1500, and they will beat you unless you play perfectly.
- Ask for rematches when they have clearly outplayed you. They just want to up their ratings against a weaker player which is clearly bullying behaviour.
Mate, grow a pair. It's online chess; it's not serious. There is a big wide world out there that is brutal and unfair.
___
1. I didn't know this existed...
2. I didn't know this existed...
3. This is fair; it is online chess...
4. This is fair; it is online chess...
5. Annoying but go to the next game; it's online chess
6. Play the London system to learn how to refute.
7. This made me laugh, learn how to refute or play to opening principles and block silly traps. If I fall for one, which I have and do. I will study the moves and recognise the pattern for next time.
8. This is fair. Its online chess
The other 5 players have each learned one different opening trap each. Now, versus each opening trap I should have a decent chance of playing, if I understand tactics. But these players are not playing at 1400 level, because each of them has memorised their opening perfectly. In effect, they're playing at 1900-2000 level because of their opening knowledge.
My chance of winning against these 5 players is no more than 20% per game. So out of 10 games, I win 2.5/5 plus 1/5 = 3.5/10 games, despite the fact that I am playing at 1400 level against fellow 1400 players. The players who have memorised a single opening have a massive, massive advantage.
You do realize that these opening traps, when refuted, leave them with a worse (often losing) position? So, they are not playing like a 1900-2000. They are hoping you play bad so their trap will work. The Stafford Gambit that you mention, for example, is easily refuted and Black just gets a much worse position out of the opening. Eugene Perelshtyn (sp) has a video giving a simple setup to refute it in the Lessons section.
Bruce Pandolfini published a book some years ago going over many of the common opening traps and how to avoid them.
Play the London System because they know it will lead to a advantageous position, this puts Black at a massive disadvantage every single game.
The London does not lead to an advantageous position. It leads to a roughly equal position with a playable middlegame for both sides. The same goes for the Colle, Torre, and KIA.
I don't think there is a game or sport which has as much unethical play as chess
You haven't been around the Internet much have you? Literally since the very first multiplayer game, there has been some sort of unethical play (i.e. AutoAim hacks in the original Quake).
I have also played some OTB chess where I have seen:
Players using an illegal move to win the game, hoping the opponent does not notice it.
Players declaring themselves the winner and walking away from the board, when in actuality there is no check-mate on the board.
Players cheating the clock or moving quickly whilst incorrectly hitting the clock for a time advantage.
Various psychological tricks and intimidation tactics instead of playing better chess, they will stare at opponents, speak a lot, get their friends to come and speak near the board etc.
All of that is against the rules and calling an arbiter over would the the proper way to resolve it.