why are, so many people here not willing to play a traditional best of three?

I always accept rematches, but often if I blunder and loss my opponent just runs, often even logs off. I get it people got other stuff, but were is your confidence then? If your, so much better why not prove with a best of three?

In what country is best of three the tradition?

Does that apply to all board games that you play?

If someone beats you and you beat them in return, don't you have the same problem after a third match?

No its best of three, if you win 2 of 3 you win the contest, if you win 1 then a draw occurred the person who won first wins the contest, if both draw a winner of the next match wins. This has been part of chess as long as I can remember.... Mandela effect perhaps?????

I'm kinda old maybe I'm losing some marbles?🤣 yes I also like star trek....

There's no obligation to give a rematch.
Nor to play 'matches'.
One can play ten consecutive games against ten different opponents.
If you're looking for a game and you get the same opponent a second time in the very next game you can abort that game before it starts.
One can also log off after every game - win or lose or draw - and attend to other things.
Sitting continually for a long time isn't healthy.
Getting up from that chair is.

Your not wrong, just a question thanks for your comment.

Hi.
I'm getting old too.
I don't want this computer chair to beat me.
So I get up from it.
That doesn't mean the chess.com session is over though.
I've noticed that people with phones seem to log off and back on constantly.
Maybe the app causes that.
-----------------------------
Spock: Fascinating captain. On old earth they had an internet and people 'logged on' to websites.
Kirk: And then we improved on that Mr. Spock. With holodecks.
Just lucky I guess.
(that's not from an episode - the internet didn't exist back then)
Lots of jokes possible about Star Trek. (the Kirk episodes didn't have holodecks)

On this site I do tactics puzzles. Unrated.
But when I was playing here - years ago - I did not do rematches and did not do takebacks either.
Anyway the opening poster asked about best of three matches.
Sometimes maybe - such things are pre-arranged.

"Traditional" best of three. Facepalm.

With facepalm you get the best of five fingers

Just don't fracture.

Don't take it personally.

If you blunder, shake your head and laugh it off. Or better yet, review the game to see what you can learn from it.

Once you manage to clean your ego away from the end-result, the losses won't sting or frustrate you - they'll just be part of the process ... and you'll no longer feel that need to prove yourself against the same opponent.

Chess is much more enjoyable when you're able to shrug off the mistakes.

There is no best of three tradition. Maybe it's a house rule in your family or your chess club or wherever you are playing OTB, but it's not a global tradition.

why do you care? just play someone else.

Good point.
Not exactly a shortage of opponents on chess.com
The opening poster is bringing up a point about 'proving'.
Which could connect to many subjects in chess.
Like people who refuse to resign in very lost positions on board and clock.
Or those who repeatedly ask for draws when they're lost or when its unclear.

with friendsand family we always played one, option of "best of three" was usually offered by the loser, being declined is not rude or an issue in any way at all. England, 1960's to present day.

Sometimes - its the winner who wants the rematch.
Then there's the issue of 'game chat'.
Should one have it enabled or disabled?
Idea: there's no 'should'. Either way.

I'm willing to play best of three loser closes account

What about loser hands over life savings?