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

Yea I'm afraid that's a swing and a miss - either I should do a better job of enunciating my thoughts or you should do a better job of reading because that's not even in the same stratosphere as to the behavior I'm referencing - at least not as I understand it. But thanks for your meaningful addition. I'll be sure and take it to heart - if ever that situation were to actually arise.

Edit: Sorry, I forgot your post was structured as a question. I believe such a player is being a bad sport. The clock is part of the game. That's not what I'm talking about though. Check out my more recent posts.

If somebody is "totally outclassed" then why would there be any time pressure on the other guy? Should be able to checkmate him easily. As for winning on time, I think the opposite of you. I think players who win on time in blitz /bullet isn't as skilled as someone who wins on time in a slower game. This gave me an idea for a new chess variant. Player can "buy" time from the other player by offering to restore captured pieces (if he's captured any). The amount of time transfer between players would be negotiated. Now, maybe I should make a chess clock to support something like this.

L&L: “It's the motive that upsets me - people who just want to win. Not learn. Not play good moves. Win. I find that crass. “

If you truly only care about learning, and not about winning, you likely wouldn’t be upset when people flag while having a lost position. So i’d suggest maybe adjusting your thought process to match your ideal for how your opponents should think. - just sayin..

For me, i lose often on time. So i try to play faster to avoid it. When I play faster, i make worse moves, more blunders, etc. If I play really slow, i make better moves - I can crush equally rated opponents... until my time runs out.. then i lose.. on time.. That’s what the clock is for! :)

@ mgx9600 That would be nice because I end up giving more time anyway and getting bupkis in return. I add +15 constantly. I give takebacks constantly. Yet my opponents still wanna cheese and all I want to do is play good chess, win or lose. And I really don't care either way. I just want to get better. Some people - all they care about is that in the end they are the winner - yay!

That's just pathetic and sad.

I'm not trying to be self-righteous and holier-than-thou. But that's how people will no doubt interpret it. I care not. It's not as if I can control what offends me. I love the game of chess.

I really don't. Except that I know they do. It's hard to explain - it's insightful on your part. 

If they had taken the same amount of time a you they wouldn't be in that position.

Oh please - I can't even create a simple thread asking a question without being given the third degree and forced to defend my stance at every turn. You're all like a pack of hyenas. There are so many rude, immature people that go looking for conflict that even when I make concessions and try to see things with a new perspective I'm attacked further. I hate the internet sometimes. So &*^# off with your arrogance charge.

[Profanity removed - David, moderator]

If your talking to me and if your referring to my post I don't see how I was making any argument. You wanted a discussion, discussions aren't so interesting if everyone agrees. I'd rather talk with people who disagree to see if I can learn something or teach them something.

Also profanity usage can get you in trouble, so I'd avoid doing that, and it kinda sounds hypocritical that you dislike others for a lack of etiquette and yet can't seem to follow site rules or show etiquette yourself.

I wasn't talking to you. You've done nothing wrong. I was talking to the Samoan who had nothing to add to the discussion but an insult. 

What good is etiquette? It's becoming abundantly clear that etiquette holds no value among chess players. So much so that even asking people's opinion on a matter leads to direct attacks and insults. So *&$# it. No more etiquette. You all win.

[Profanity removed - David, moderator]

*#$& you.

I'll be damned before I ask a question without rudeness. It's not just me. Go to any thread on this site. Look at the number of snide remarks and rude behavior. Well I'm done with the forums. You can all go to hell. I have better things to do then waste my time trying to reason with combative people.

[And again - David]

All this... well, I don't care too much about the other player's philosophy, it is as valid as anyone else's, provided it doesn't break the rules. No takebacks on my games, in the other hand.

Just about every thread on this site is rife with rudeness.

I'm done with the forums here. People are more interested in rebuke and lecturing others than they are being helpful, patient and insightful. On the first page alone I had to re-explain what I actually meant several times because people were just looking for ways to find conflict. See a comment - think of a witty way to be rude. That comes easy. You people are a dime-a-dozen. Virtue, on the other hand, takes effort. I'm tired of seeing people being insulted and attacked at every turn. Well I'll have no part of it. Goodbye.  /thread  /unfollow

Thanks to the few helpful people who provided insight and gave me a new perspective. 

I think time is a part of strategy. if you lose because of time it means you're just get beaten at 'mind gaming'. so it's clearly fair and it's your false if you lost your time

If you are ahead a full knight, but only have 4 seconds left on your clock, can we really say that is a "winning position?"

Keping that hand on the clock in the correct postion is every bit as much a part of chess, and keeping that knight or bishop or king in a good position.

Here`s where I wholeheartedly agree with kaynight!

 

Haha. When my son first learned chess, his bullet rating was1600? because he'd make a move really fast and just try to win on time.  I saw him win many games that way.  Kind of silly, but seemed fun to a 6yr old.

It's funny how many threads we have on the same subject. If you can't handle faster time controls, play longer time controls. I make no apologies if I win on time. It means I didn't spend too much time thinking about moves and managed my time better than my opponent.

I think it's just the opposite of what the poster said who claimed that weaker players win on time.. I would think it was the weaker player who tends to lose on time, because they get stumped easier and cannot think as quickly as their opponents. I know I tend to get in time trouble pretty quickly if I play someone 500-600 rating points better than me.