what to do about poor sports who kill the clock in live chess?

i just played a game against a player by the handle of [Name Removed].  when it became clear that i had the advantage he said that i was taking too long.  i figure that people shouldn't join long games if they aren't patient enough to play through, so i don't care when people complain about me taking my time to think through my moves.  then he notifies me that he wants to resign but he would rather torture me.  so, he plays through until i'm one move away from checkmating him, and then 16 minutes later i win on time. 

people have done this to me before on here and i'm wondering if there's any way of reporting them?  or maybe when it happens again if i can contact an admin who could quickly review the game and its corresponding dialogue and intervene to force the opponent to resign so i don't have to wait for it to time out? 

i want to take the score ranking system seriously and work to improve mine, but jerks like the one i just encountered undermine that system with their malicious shenanigans by making me want to resign and give them the score increase instead of my time.

i would really appreciate hearing back from a chess.com authority figure on this matter.

Seriously...if you ABSOLUTELY are going to win in one move, go eat some toast and come back in 16 minutes. Yeah, he's kind of a [edited for language], but who cares? You won.

how do i file an abuse form?  when i go back to view that game, i can't see the chat dialogue.  he very clearly was being a poor sport.  i hadn't done anything to insult him.  he was just frustrated that i was taking the time allotted to that game, so he up and left without resigning. 

schachgeek, it seems you didn't read my post.  he said he would rather torture me.  i didn't put it too clearly, but i did imply that he joined my game. 

dec_lan, that is what i usually do, but it is obnoxious to have to come back to the computer twice (twice when i have less time left than opponent); it would be much nicer if there was a way for me to get an admin to police the situation.

http://support.chess.com/index.php?_m=tickets&_a=submit

i just filed an abuse form.  when i went back to review the game i could not see the chat log, so i wonder if maybe the support staff won't be able to see it either? 

again, it would be much nicer if i could just contact an admin to police the situation when this sort of thing is happening so i don't have to sit through the game only to file an abuse report against some joker who is only going to start a new account to clean the slate when too many abuse reports have piled up against him/her. 

if chess.com can get some kind of police force together to clear up these situations as they are happening (i waited forty minutes for a game to end one time in a similar situation), then i will more seriously consider becoming a paying member.  filing abuse reports seems to be a waste of my time for reasons already mentioned.

we're going to address this in the future in 2 ways:

#1 - allowing you to play multiple games at once. so, if a jerk decides to wait it out for 40 minutes, you can fire up another game and play two at once. or three. your decision. NOTE: this will be for premium members only. 

#2 - we are considering implementing a feedback system. 

sorry to hear about it. make sure you block that person. 

More annoying is when you're playing a long time control correspondence game (10 or 14 day), when some diamond members mysteriously go on vacation for two months when you get the upper hand...

Yes, I'm currently beating a 2500 rated player in correspondence chess, and it's 14 day controls, so he waits for 13 days to make a move.  it will be a long tedious endgame.  You can look at my current games to see who i'm talking about.  He's obviously a poor sport who can't handle losing.  I just think it's funny that he lost to me and can't take it.

but can't you play multiple correspondence games at once?  not quite the same thing as when it happens in live chess

 1st paragraph: Don't worry, they'll be able to see the chat log. (amazing the things staff can do ).

2nd paragraph: There are ways of tracking ppl who make new accounts, amoung them IP address, etc.

3rd paragraph: Don't you win after only a few minutes on game abandoned if they don't move (meaning the mouse, like if they leave the computer) for say 5 minutes? If they are actively moving their mouse on the chess.com page (which I'm fairly certain chess.com can detect), I think you can be fairly certain they are paying some attention to the game.

Were you filing the abuse report for letting the clock run or for threatening to "torture" you? If the second, you can block that member and never have to play them again.

we both started out with all the same pieces -- he had his chance -- so how does going for the win make me a bad sport? 

i might not have opted for taking the easy way if he hadn't been complaining about how long i was taking earlier in the game when i didn't have as big an advantage -- by the end, i just wanted to get it over with.  i really wasn't taking a terribly long time for any of my moves.  people who are in a hurry need to abstain from joining long games.

Sore winner.

Re: "#1 - allowing you to play multiple games at once. so, if a jerk decides to wait it out for 40 minutes, you can fire up another game and play two at once. or three. your decision."

Awesome! Thanks, Erik!

.

Re: "Your opponent has every right to use the clock just as you do. If your position had gone south, would you continue to blitz out moves or would you spend a little more time looking for the best move? If you answered yes, then why is that unacceptable behavior from an opponent?"

Are you serious? He's talking about a person who was one move away from being mated and let the clock run down 16 minutes.  And notice, Erik referred to such individuals as jerks!

.

Re: "Hey, I saw this game. You had a Q, a N, and two pawns against his lone K and you went for another Q. You are the bad sport."

Have you considered the possibility that he does not know how to end the game (or not quickly) with a Q and N?  Take a look at his rating.  I've been in situations where I went for an additional queen either because (1) I couldn't qyickly figure out how to finish the game (when my game was a little weaker last year) or (2) I knew it would be quicker if I just got the extra queen. Who is either of those being a bad sport?

.

Re: feedback, perhaps requiring members who give negative feedback (I'm guessing a positive/negative option) also provide a reason for it (e.g., options to indicate (a) abusive language, (b) let time run out, (etc.).  This would allow members to contest the claims made, I would imagine.  Although I'd hate to be the one in charge of checking those claims ;-)

Personally, I don't see anything wrong with naming people who pull that crap. Why should people who pull stuff like that be protected?

You should have turned chat off after your opponent annoyed you first.

People who know they would get negative feedback always oppose any kind of feedback system....

Probably true!

Seven days, so far I'll suppose.