What is your opinion about players who try to win on time when dead lost?

I understand like, in bullet or ultra-bullet, it's actually very much a part of the game. And even in blitz/rapid/classical when your opponent takes too long - you know that's part of the game. I am talking about situations when your opponent is dead, dead lost and they try and cheese out a victory on time. And sometimes they succeed. Sometimes not.

Here are my thoughts. I don't want to win like that. If it were me, and I were beat OTB. Positionally, tactically - whatever - I've been outplayed. I've been beaten. At chess. I don't want the win. In fact, I would resign if I thought I might win such a game. I don't expect everyone to be that way. That's just me. It's perfectly reasonable for anyone in that situation to take the victory on time. It's part of chess.

But people who don't resign, when they've been totally outclassed, hoping to win on time....I'm not talking about worse....I'm talking about dead, dead lost (down a piece in the endgame, etc), and they try and hang on and cheese out a win....I'm sorry. I have zero respect for that player as a human being.

For the 204,383,509,707,324,021,431st. time.  The clock is part of the game.

Is that all you have to add? Nothing else?

I thought I made it clear that I am distinguishing between the clock being part of the game and people who refuse to resign lost positions hoping to cheese the clock. I believe chess players should have class and be upstanding in character. Maybe I'm naive in hoping most people here would agree with me on this. After all, this is the kind of internet forum where snide remarks and rude behavior are the norm - where people are more interested in witty rebuke than in patience, helpfulness and insight.

Hmm...now that's something I haven't considered. The money aspect.

Yes, someone may be in financial difficulty - or just could really use the money. I am not going to condemn or look down on anyone for doing whatever they have to do - no matter how classless and base it would appear - in order to make ends meet. I am quite blessed that I don't have to worry about finances (at least right now) so it would be presumptuous, privileged and wrong to cast judgment in such situations.

Its irritating to lose a won game on the clock. That being said the clock IS, a part of the game and if you cannot defeat your opponent in the allotted time you lose. What is so confusing about that?

Are you serious about your last comment? 

I find such players to be trying to achieve a win, and thus, I opine them to be wise.

The inability of a player to manage the clock is just as serious a fault as an error in calculation.

Conversely, for a player to claim that he only lost because of the clock is just as foolish as for a driver to claim that he only had an accident because he was drunk.

I think your question doesn't make any sense.  If someone has a reasonable* chance of getting a win (or even a draw) on time, then they are clearly not "dead lost."  It is then your job to prove your superiority and show that you will be able to win despite the time deficit.  Basically, if someone doesn't have a reasonable chance of flagging me, then that means that I should be able to prove it quickly enough that I don't care that they're continuing to play.

*What constitutes a "reasonable" chance does, of course, vary from position to position and from player to player.  I could probably do the KQ vs K checkmate in less than a minute against any player, but if I have KBPP vs. KN, I wouldn't fault anyone for continuing to play on even if I had as much as 10 minutes left, or possibly more against a really strong competitor.

Also what truly makes up for the few disappointments of losing a won game on time, is when you # the opponent trying to sneak in a clock win, just in the nick of time.

Trust me, in a 3I0 blitz, I had a win against one such player with the clock reading 0:00.1!!

Was a delightful feeling

You play to win the game, you just don't play to play.

Agree. You spent too much time making your better moves and now you want that time back. Sorry, you can't have it.  I maybe lost a piece because I was managing my time and moved too quickly. I'd like to have it back, but guess what, sorry, I can't have it.

I think they're geniuses.

"What is your opinion about players who try to win on time when dead lost?"

I consider it just part of the game.

I've played a lot of blitz and bullet over the years. Eventually, you come to expect it. After all, clock management is one of the defining characteristics of speed chess.

Both players are playing blitz/bullet because of the thrill of racing against the clock. To complain about an opponent who's trying to flag you in a lost position is kind of missing the point of speed chess.

That very struggle is a big part of what blitz and bullet are all about.

Just because you're winning, that doesn't mean you're entitled to a resignation from your opponent.

You still have to earn the win, and your opponent still has the clock as their last resource to wield against you.

As pointed out, had you played faster, you might not have played such long strong moves, and had you opponent thought longer, he or she might not have blundered. I say let the clock count down. learn time management.

Yea, I guess I have to point this out again - for some reason people have a tendency to only want to read/hear what allows them an opportunity to correct someone.

I am talking about people in dead lost positions, without a significant time advantage, that continue to play - with a different approach (making fast moves, complicating but weakening moves, etc) - with the clear intent of cheesing a game on time. I can understand in Bullet or Ultra-Bullet - or even if you have a significant time advantage (except I would still resign - that's just me), but to do it every single time....I think it's low class. And I don't have a problem saying it.

I am not saying the rules should be changed or anything of the sort - I'm just asking how people respond/feel about those situations.

Thank goodness it doesn't happen OTB nearly as often as online.

I think the thing that bothers me so much - when it probably shouldn't - is that people put more stock in the technicality of a win than they do the heart of chess. It's like when people play deliberately bad moves hoping to win right away and such. I don't know why this bothers me, but it does. I love this game.

I don't care if I win or lose - I just want to play as good as I possibly can. And if I have a choice between playing good moves and losing and playing bad moves and winning - I'd rather play good moves and lose. Early on in the thread I made an exception for those who play for money because I understand that needing to eat is important, too. But playing online - lichess for instance - people had literally rather win than anything. And I find that ugly.

I can't tell you have many times someone blunders terribly and then asks for a takeback. I'm not talking about a mouseslip - I mean they miss something completely...a blunder - and they want a takeback. Why? Does a technical win really mean more to you than chess itself? I find that offensive but I let them have it.  Every single time I let them off the hook.

Why not? After all, it's all they'll ever get out of chess.

Like I said, then it's your job to prove it.  Maybe they don't understand how they would convert the position to a win and want to see your technique.  Maybe they were taught to "never resign" and have yet to understand when resigning would be proper.  Maybe they don't understand that the position is as "dead lost" as you believe it to be.  Maybe they're trying some desperate moves to try to trick you into a stalemate.  Just prove that you know what you're doing and end the game as quickly as you can.  Either the game will soon be over or they'll buy a clue and end the game themselves.  As long as they have hope that the game will end up something other than a loss for them, then it's your job to kill that hope as quickly and efficiently as possible.

I agree. And sometimes I don't - and I lose on time. And then I'm not mad because it was justified. It's the motive that upsets me - people who just want to win. Not learn. Not play good moves. Win. I find that crass. Tournaments - with money on the line - I get it. Online, I'm sorry, I just don't get it. Maybe it's me.