Game Adjudication

[Edited due to ommision of player names]

Is there a game adjudication committee in this site? I'm playing a 3-day Correspondence Chess and I do respect the time for my opponent to make a move. But I think the game is already won and my opponent is just prolonging the game by not moving up until his time is almost out. See game below:

If my guess is correct the game might take at least 10 moves before Black ultimately have checkmate.

If I can make a move right after he did, then 14 x 3 days = 42 days, just to arrive at the inevitable. Moves per day is ok up until move 30, when I got the upper hand.

I have the same problem in this game:

Well, the game is still playable but my advantage is clear and even decisive.

If there's a game adjudication committee out there, the official tournament will go on faster.

So I am not raising this issue for myself only. Other players might have the same problem. Even one player who is doing this scheme will affect tournaments severely. 

If there's no adjudication committee, I strongly suggest that there be one.

How about respecting your opponent, and the way he wants to play. It is not that difficult.

Like I said, I do respect his time. We played the first 30 moves in 2 or 3 days and after that, when I got the advantage, there goes the prolonged wait for the next move. I even made conditional moves to save on obvious moves.

For the first game I showed, the intention is clear. Its just to prolong the game. What is there to think about taking care of a bunch of pawns?

for the second game, well my opponent can really take time. But then, advantage is very much decisive.

Respect is also deserved by the other players waiting for a tournament to go on, isn't it?

1. You can't tell why others do this.
There were times when I've had two 24 hour shifts and only one rest day in-between, and I didn't check my games.
There may be some problem in their lives, and other matters to attend to.
2. If you agree to the time controls before a game starts, you have no reason or right to complain about your opponent fully using his/her time.
If you're playing in an OTB tournament, and your opponent takes all of his time to think and in the end makes no move, giving you the win, there's no room to complain. It was within the rules and the time control you both agreed to.
3. If you don't like slow games, or stalling, you should never have started a correspondence game. They're known for that. And you knew that before starting the game.
4. You show your opponents' username and your games without their consent, and you talk about respect.
5. Use the 'correspondence premove', where you can make lines that go off automatically once your opponent answers.

 

If a game allows a player to take 3 days to make a move then the player is entitled to take up to three days for each move. To suggest otherwise is ungracious. If the game is too long for you then don't play 3-day per move games. There are plenty of opportunities to play games with shorter time controls.

@GnrfFrtzl and corum

My suggestion is for games that has no chance to turn the tables around.Have you check the ending position in my first game shown? There's no resistance any more.

As for the second game I put it there because its an official tournament being held back by such a tactic.

I play correspondence because of poor internet connection and also busy time schedules. the game isnt long, I can wait 3 days, but I believe its not right to abuse such time control just to prolong time being defeated. 

What you propose is really unfair, though.
Do you want an engine evaluation to decide who's the winner in a position? That'd be the death of chess.
You're not in a position to claim your overwhelming advantage and superiority over anyone else.
Two players play the game.

There is nothing wrong with the current version and accepted way of playing correspondence, nor any other time controls.
You both agreed to the time controls.
You have all the right to use your time as you see fit, so does your opponent.

You don't call the arbiter over when your opponent doesn't make a move for 30 minutes, even in a lost position, or do you?
You can get up, take a walk, smoke a cig, do whatever you want.
But you don't complain about your opponent using your time.

That is one of the most disrespectful things you can do in chess.

Long story short, act like a grown up, be professional, learn a little patience and a bit of humility.
 

@GnrfFrtzl

The engine is also just a suggestion. In another site, there is an adjudication process made by the site moderators. I believe that is applicable here but not to be abused also.

I did not propose this "adjudication" just because of my experience in one game. I have another where my opponent is taking his time, its ok to me because we are in the middlegame and the position is too open that makes the game complicated.

Also, you can stop relating correspondence chess with OTB. I think you will agree that the two are completely different scenario. In Correspondence, I can sleep while my opponent is twisting his brains. Just one thing, if this is OTB I would not complain, I can win a similar position if my opponent in time trouble, would you agree?

You're telling me to act like a grown up? Doesn't it occur to you that this is a kind of abuse? The player I'm talking here just logged in 3 hours ago. He has 8 hours left, and did not bothered to make a move. Now its just 5 hours, and just moments ago I saw him still online. Maybe four hours later he will make a move after the afternoon nap. I resign a game that's already lost or futile to continue. Isn't that sportmanship? Oh, maybe there's a chance of stalemate.

He may be hoping that you'll lose concentration and do something that he can force a stalemate with - or he may be thinking that he's giving you a chance to exercise your end game technique. It's the agreed time control, and he's entitled to use his full allotment of time in any way he sees fit, just as you are entitled to do so.

Setting up conditional premoves is a great idea - and if you can figure out how to force him into a position with limited moves available, you can then just script out the rest of the game and forget it.

That is exactly right, you said it yourself: There is still chance of giving stalemate or you losing by blundering horribly.

There is no way to abuse the time control. If he wants to take his time he is entitled to do so. Yea, it does seem childish if he played fast earlier and suddenly when he lost the position he started to take time because of spite. There is nothing you can do about it. Join into shorter time controls if you want your opponent playing faster.

In the end you will probably win the game so be happy about it and play premoves as much as possible. And you can always taunt your opponent in chat if you want to but that would be just as childish

You know what guys. I totally agree with all of you regarding the "Time Control" agreement. Each has his right in his own time.

But imagine a scenario, say its a forced mate in 5 moves. Putting this in conditional moves will still prolong the game by a maximum of 15 days under a 3-day correspondences chess. Wouldn't it be futile to continue? Even a force mate in 2 which is very obvious can be prolonged my 6 days. 

In a position without any kind of resistance, this is what I'm proposing. For Correspondence Chess that it is.

Yes I'm already happy at move 30. 

There really is nothing I can do if he takes his time. And my allegation of just prolonging the game cannot be proven. So that is why I'm proposing the adjudication.

There is this article in chess.com itself, can you guys read it?

http://www.chess.com/chessopedia/view/adjudication

I just surf it now, but I dont know if its enforced.

I have some sympathy with what you are saying. I just think it is a matter of principle that in chess a game only ends when someone is checkmated, resigns, when there is stalemate or when a draw is agreed. 

I agree it is frustrating. But let's face it, when one agrees to a game being played at days per move, since the average game is 40 moves, this means that the game will last on average 80x3 = 240 days (assuming each player takes their full time allocation each move. Given that, does it really matter if it takes an extra 5 (or even 15) days to finish it off? To me it is not important enough a saving to justify a change to the funadamental principles of the game - where you are suggesting that a third party or some software decides the outcome.

I just read it

http://www.chess.com/chessopedia/view/adjudication

But it has nothing to do with your situation. Adjudication can be used when, for whatever reason, a game cannot be completed. This can happen, for example, at an OTB tournament where there is not time to complete a game. But your games are running perfectly normally and there is no reason why they should not be completed.

It's not really prolonging, since if you make conditional lines, they play out automatically without even showing up in your feed.

About the grown up part:
I only meant that you should just realise that you agreed to the time control.
I have games where my opponents stall, as well, but I don't make threads about it. Why?
Because I'm full aware what I was going to take up. I was aware of all the conditions before accepting the game, or making a seek.
This is what I mean about being an adult.

I'm only comparing this to OTB because the rules of respecting your opponents' time is just the same.

What you're presenting is not the abusing of the system.
Abusing it would be to activate vacation endlessly.
This is well within the rules, and even if it may seem unethical and unsportsmanlike, it's just as unethical to post games with their names visible and complaining about them on a public forum.

This is also what I meant by being a grown up.

 

That would be a sensational scenario for you - yes, the game would go for another 15 days, but in none of those days would the game be sitting there waiting for to execute your move: you don't even see it, it just executes your move and then waits for his next move. If shouldn't be taking up any of your brain space, with no risk of mistakes on your part either.

@corum

Thanks for the sympathy. I just thought maybe there's some kind of remedy. And just like what you said, I can't do anything about it. And hey, maybe in 5 hours I will win by time forfeit.

About the engine thing, that really suck, I withdraw the idea. But if its site moderators, just maybe there's a chance. 

I'm used to long chess games. My single OTB can lasts 6 hours. As for correspondence chess, of course I pre-agreed that it will be a very long game.

Its just that, when a position is already winning, with no chance of counter attack (ei, passed pawn, or still have enough pieces to mate), I think its futile to wait another 15 days. In my current official chess.com tournament, all the participants "might" be affected by this kind of scenario.

But the tournament is hanging.

I need to show the game so that people can understand why I'm bringing this up. 

But you could have at least replace their names and ratings by XXXX-s or such.
Common courtesy, I'd say.
The site allows it for this specific reason.
There are threads that are shut down because of this.
I'd go as far as to say you basically humiliated them publicly.