Yup, I agree, it's not so much of a pawn loss. Still, I think it's crazy that you can't win in three moves.
Can't get beat in three moves?
Sort:
The minimum 3 moves rating change rule is totally unfair. I recently had a game where I had an advantage after a higher rated player made a bad pawn play on move #2. On my third move I took that pawn. Then the player simply didn't play for 3 days and I won because time ran out. No rating change happened though.
This is a horrible flaw in the chess.com rating system: Essentially, if you play a rated game and make a mistake on your 2nd move, you can always tank the game and avoid a rating drop. Players that know about this loophole can simply just "try out" unusual or aggressive openings and can always bail if the other player counters correctly.
I've had similar situations happen like this before but this one was the worst game tankings by far. I understand that it's unfair if someone has a bad internet connection with a short time limit but on a 3 day game?! This rule should only be enforced on games which have a very short time limit.
Right as I am about to break 1700, I beat someone in three moves, but wait... I don't win any points. Here is the game. http://www.chess.com/livechess/game.html?id=122973340 He drops a pawn resignes the game. It makes since to not award any points after one move, but not after three or even two. It is possible to win a game in two moves. As a paid member, I would like to suggest this rule be changed.