You can infer that if losing on time upsets them, they should play longer games or games with an increment. I'll never understand these people that agree to the terms of the game and then are shocked when the terms of the game work against them.
Winning on time in blitz when opponent is kicking your butt...
Sort:
May 12, 2013
0
#3
reflectivist wrote:
So, it is always interesting when a player is getting taken apart and would surely lose if not for the clock, in blitz.
I'm sure the player who is positionally winning is gloating, "but I played a better game!" and that has different implications depending on how much more time s/he took to play that game. Sometimes it's absurd. They waste huge amounts of time to come up with perfect moves.
But if someone is winning on the board and loses by only a second or too, ouch! What inferences can really be drawn?
Sometimes having low time can actually help the person with low time on a psychological level, as the opponent may think that you are just moving without thinking, when in reality, you are making a winning threat. My most recent thread had a good example of that type of psychology-It was a blitz game where I had only 0:27 seconds left when I made a checkmate threat. http://www.chess.com/forum/view/game-showcase/awesome-checkmate2?lc=1#last_comment
So, it is always interesting when a player is getting taken apart and would surely lose if not for the clock, in blitz.
I'm sure the player who is positionally winning is gloating, "but I played a better game!" and that has different implications depending on how much more time s/he took to play that game. Sometimes it's absurd. They waste huge amounts of time to come up with perfect moves.
But if someone is winning on the board and loses by only a second or too, ouch! What inferences can really be drawn?