I didn't abandon the game but I lost and my rating went down.

"Rating is just a number"..... They said! 

I'm on V2 and both links work for me.

Looking at your recent live games, I found two that were considered abandoned:

https://www.chess.com/live/game/1656873631 - in that game, you had 8'28'' on the clock after the opponent's move #14; the game was declared abandoned when you had 3'27'' left.

https://www.chess.com/live/game/1656284204 - in that one, you had 6'55'' on the clock after the opponent's move #16; the game was declared abandoned when you had 1'53'' left (incidentally, your opponent had a completely winning position at that time).

This does not seem to be just a 'minute longer than normal' to me, and is consistent with the earlier described criteria: when no move is made after 1/2 of the total time control, the game is declared abandoned.

Consider using V3 (link to 'new chess.com' at the very bottom of each page); the game interface is supposed to be more reliable in there (also, any bugs in V2, which might have contributed to the above results, are not going to be fixed, as the switch to V3 approaches). I have found some games played in V3, which seem to indicate that in that version players are allowed to run the clock down to zero, regardless of the position.

You have a very good point here. Packets get lost sometimes, and implementing a handshake should prevent such occurrences.

However, note that the above scenario is not consistent with OP's description that the game was ended prematurely "when i was just about to move a piece."

Good idea about having a choice of time limit for any individual move; I would encourage you to submit this to the support via https://support.chess.com/customer/portal/emails/new (select 'Suggestions' from the menu).

thank you, the_chess_zebra, finaly a voice of reason. Chess.com follow the RULES! don't make up your own. like the zebra says let the players decide the parameters. Oh and just because Im losing a game and trying to figure out a move to make that might turn my position around, I shouldn't be automatically abandoned their should be a warning, like if you dont move in 20 seconds the game will be considered abandoned. I souldnt have to calculate time constraints while contenplating a move. The clock IS the time constraint but it lies because of your additional site rules. Agai why even have clocks if the players arent allowed to use the time given to them. I dissagree with zebra in that in a 45 min game if somone wants to use up all their time for one move they should be allowed to. if the oponent wants to win and win on time well they should be patient and wait. No one has patience anylonger. good things come to those who wait. If you are unwilling to wait for a win you should resign or not play a marathon game in the first place.

You can't seriously be arguing that in a 45 minute game over the internet, you should be allowed to make someone sit around for 45 minutes waiting for your first move.

The USCF has a rule that if you are 1 hour late for a live over the board tournament game, a forfeit will be declared. (This was set up when time controls were often as slow as 40 moves in two and a half hours.) 

While it is true that if you are sitting at your board in a live over the board game, you would be allowed to sit there and let your clock run out before you played your first move, your opponent would have the reassurance of seeing you sitting there. (However, if you showed up for the start of a game, made your first move and then took off for the balance of the time control without resigning, you would certainly be kicked out of the tournament.) 

That reassurance isn't available online.  Many of us have spent very long times waiting for opponents to make moves in long time control games. Sometime, people are thinking. (I have had people remind me of the time control occasionally.)  Sadly, some people abandon games without resigning. They shut down their browsers and leave their opponents hanging. This happens way too often in longer time control games. It is one reason that long time control games are much less popular than blitz and bullet on the internet.

How to limit this? Forfeiting the game if you haven't made a move in one half of the total game time seems like a reasonable concession to the fact that 99.9999999% of people won't actually take 45 minutes for their first move, if they are still connected. They won't take 22 and half minutes either.

If anyone has ever done it, it would be the kind of thing that people tell stories about, and then laugh and shake their heads.  According to Chess Life, in 1989 a Russian named Utyemov did not make a single move in his game against a Grandmaster Vyzmanavin.

Is that what you are fighting for? (The right to do that?)

notmtwain, if i said first move I meant second move and on. If the person playing white doesn't initiate a move the game never started and the game is aborted without penalty to either after some period. im ok with aborted games that were never started in the first place and that do not penalize either player. yes notmtwain i am fighting for the right to use time as the player sees fit. its the players right to use the clock as part of the strategy and this strategy is more pronounced if both players are running low on time. Yes, Zebra is reasonable unlike some of the other commentors around here who just want to say negative things directed at me. Just because i don't agree with every point he makes i agree with the majority of what he says. please say goodbye again,(you know who you are) or you could contribute something meaningful to the discussion.

not meningful, I started the disscussion remember? Kaynight your last comment makes you "that guy" good luck with that.

The problem with letting people "Use there time as they see fit" is it allows what we all see with online chess games.  Someone blunders, starts to lose, etc.  They sit there...they dont resign, they dont move, they sit there just to get even.  While its not an ideal system, its put in place for a reason.  Its the same with vacation abuse.  Poeple start to lose, etc, and they go on vacation.  I dont understand it, but it happens.  How is using up your vacation "punishing" someone else?

Indeed, and an impartial observer watching the clock ticking for half the game, while a player is a rook and bishop behind and the king in the middle of the board, would likely conclude that the above describe scenario is happening (note that this was not the case in the other game that Lance lost recently due to "abandonment" -- he had some advantage there, and was quite right to be unhappy about the outcome).

BTW, Lance, you do make a great point here:

That warning is definitely a good idea. I would encourage you to submit this to the support via https://support.chess.com/customer/portal/emails/new (select 'Suggestions' from the menu); pointing out this thread in the ticket would ensure that everything discussed here would get considered.

Thanks for being receptive to my suggestion LegoPirateSenior and realizing that I am not a jerk abandoning games because I'm losing. Do I sometimes take too long to make a move? sure!  I'm not a super computer. I'm a human who sometimes needs time to think. But even if some people make you wait out of spite, thats part of the game. I am prepared to wait and have done so many times. I have actually made a few people wait too. I will admit that I have made a few opponents who have been downright A holes in chat wait a few minutes instead of resigning or letting them have mate. If the opponent is a true sportsman I will let them have the mate or I resign. If I am in a hopless position I usually say "GG" and if they respond in a egotistical condesending way as opposed to a gracious victor I am more apt to let the clock tick down. If they respond with a "GG" in kind I will resign or let them have mate. If you want to win you should have to wait to win, by the rules, if the opponent doesnt move. If one cannot wait to win on time they don't deserve the win IMHO. And all this has nothing to do with actually abandoning the game. The half the time rule should not exist at all! If you sign up for a marathon game like 45 min. you should bring your running shoes and a whole lotta water and uh patience! Patience is a virtue  and like sportsmanship both are dying as a result of a culture intent on instant gratification and superfluous rules like the 1/2 time rule that would never exist in a person to person game. Kid: "Are we there yet mom?" Mom: "no we are only half way there only 22.5 minutes left to go son, so please stop asking every minute. Soon, when you grow up, you will learn to be patient my son." perhaps Chess.com will grow up one day because i know for certain not all the players will.  

Chess.com has grown up. That move time wasn't in place in the past and people would let time run down after getting into a losing position. They still do it and making people wait because their opponent is a poor loser isn't the best solution either. 

I was being butally honest Martin_Stahl which is something of a rareity these days. Being spiteful or pissed off is never a good solution when winning or losing but it happens  and will continue to happen regardless of the 1/2 time rule put in place. I think you missed that, that was the point I was tring to make. Don't take it personally when I say chess.com has regressed to the child in the backseat. Chess.com please follow the rules of actual chess. Winning or losing on time is a "time" honored (pun intended) part of the tradition we call chess, the best board game ever made. 

Yes, it still happens. But with the move time limit, there is less of an impact when it is done maliciously. I don't think there is a perfect solution to the problem, but a warning of some sort if it remains in effect is probably a good compromise.

If the half time rule makes it less of an impact, then why did i lose several games recently without warning or actually abandoning it. Sometimes I need to take a pee or poo and I expect the game to still be there when I get back. B.S. less of an impact. It is a new rule, that changes the dynamic of a game, a game that has been the same for a few centuries. A game I respect more than a silly web fabricated version that somehow manages to get worse with time. Sometimes "progress" is actually just the adulteration of tradition.

Methinks Kaynight still has nothing meanigful to contribute to the discussion.

Can you post links to these games?

there should be a bitchin rating level that you are not allowed to bitch until you reach 1200

I said it makes less of an impact when making opponents wait is done maliciously...

You can't honestly think that it is fine for a player to walk away from a game for 20+ minutes just because they decided to spite you and just let you win on time? Or, wait until the last 30 seconds or so on their clock to duddenly make a move hoping you stepped away or are doing something else so that they will end up getting the win on time.

I would guess that the vast majority of games decided in this manner were people maliciously letting time run out and not people thinking a long time on a move or just stepped away for a few minutes. 

For shorter time controls, the system is probably over zealous, but for longer ones, it is beneficial, in most cases.