good idea, but then this would no longer be "chess.com"
Windfall Tax (Penalizing Accidental Checkmates)
Sort:
Jun 4, 2010
0
#43
mprhchess wrote: good idea, but then this would no longer be "chess.com"
It's actually been why_didn't_he_resign.com for a while; they just haven't got around to changing the domain name yet.
Jun 5, 2010
0
#44
paul211 wrote: Art, I have never seen you call a checkmate in even an easy 2 move mate, ...
I call it like I see it.
Jun 5, 2010
0
#45
Samsonite220 wrote: lol, this is too good.
'Too good' in what sense? Too good to be true, perhaps?
Jun 5, 2010
0
#47
paul211 wrote:
Art, I have never seen you call a checkmate in even an easy 2 move mate, ...
Since I have never beaten you, I correctly haven't called my checkmate.
Calling your checkmates would be pointless until chess.com implements this change.
bad idea. Too hard to enforce and no way of knowing if the person lied.
artfizz wrote:
Loomis wrote: How about a pre-emptive call on the opponent. If you point out your opponent has mate-in-N you salvage 1/4 point.
If I had a ¼ for every time I pointed out mate-in-N, I'd have ... let me think ...
Apr 1, 2011
0
#51
wormrose wrote: Mate in three - two - one - I resign.
It would neat to have an [optional] audio countdown for forced mates.
Apr 1, 2011
0
#52
artfizz wrote:
wormrose wrote: Mate in three - two - one - I resign.
It would neat to have an [optional] audio countdown for forced mates.
I would put this on the list of extraordinarily annoying features. What we really need is a computer that tells the opponent when it is appropriate to resign.
Apr 2, 2011
0
#53
wormrose wrote: Mate in three - two - one - I resign.
artfizz wrote: It would neat to have an [optional] audio countdown for forced mates.
wormrose wrote: I would put this on the list of extraordinarily annoying features. What we really need is a computer that tells the opponent when it is appropriate to resign.
I'll be ready with this next 1st April: "chess.com is adding an advisory pop-up - 'Your position is hopeless; you should consider resigning (and maybe taking up checkers).' "
Apr 2, 2011
0
#54
artfizz wrote:
wormrose wrote: Mate in three - two - one - I resign.
artfizz wrote: It would neat to have an [optional] audio countdown for forced mates.
wormrose wrote: I would put this on the list of extraordinarily annoying features. What we really need is a computer that tells the opponent when it is appropriate to resign.
I'll be ready with this next 1st April: "chess.com is adding an advisory pop-up - 'Your position is hopeless; you should consider resigning (and maybe taking up checkers).' "
Please make it audible and loud - "Please step away from the board! If you continue to play you will be reported for abusive behaivior. You couldn't win a game of Tic Tac Toe even if you had White."
Apr 2, 2011
0
#55
wormrose wrote: Mate in three - two - one - I resign.
artfizz wrote: It would neat to have an [optional] audio countdown for forced mates.
wormrose wrote: I would put this on the list of extraordinarily annoying features. What we really need is a computer that tells the opponent when it is appropriate to resign.
artfizz wrote: I'll be ready with this next 1st April: "chess.com is adding an advisory pop-up - 'Your position is hopeless; you should consider resigning (and maybe taking up checkers).' "
wormrose wrote: Please make it audible and loud - "Please step away from the board! If you continue to play you will be reported for abusive behaivior. You couldn't win a game of Tic Tac Toe even if you had White."
"... and don't even THINK of going on vacation!!!"
Nobody has to see every checkmate they play; the reward for anticipating stuff is that you achieve that mate more often. 
As Capa (I think) said: a great player is always lucky; the good stuff always seems to happen to him.
And come on, who doesn't enjoy a little chess luck once in a while ("oh! that's mate?") :)
MM78 wrote:
AMcHarg wrote:
It's a bad idea, too hard to enforce and pointless anyway. Arguably every checkmate is luck because you didn't see it from the start of the game.
speak for yourself
(please turn your irony detector on, or borrow one perhaps)
I don't really think it's possible to know for sure the solemnness of his suggestions, unless perhaps he has that kind of reputation (even so, not everyone knows it)-- which I'm assuming he does because you're so sure -- there have certainly been crazier things said that were totally serious -- no need to insult this guy for defending the rules of the game; no need for someone with an actual opinion to be thought of as lower than you, incapable of understanding something that need not be inherently obvious.
Apr 2, 2011
0
#58
Elubas wrote:
; no need for someone with an actual opinion to be thought of as lower than you, incapable of understanding something that need not be inherently obvious.
My actual opinion is that all of my opinions come from being biased, narrow minded, stupid and old; and/or because I am a puppet of the current administration. If I was smart I would think like normal people. It's easy to spot the reckless, agressive maniacs. They are the ones driving faster than me on the highway. Those who are driving slower are the morons.
I'm sorry, I'm not quite sure what your point is. Note I'm not saying someone with an "actual opinion" is any higher than those without one -- in this context -- either (I'm sorry if the way I structured my statement implied that -- I just didn't like that one response I quoted) -- as they are just trying to have some fun with this; I'm just saying you shouldn't criticise someone who is genuinely trying to address a topic that he thinks could be solemn or facetious.
great idea!!!