Pre-Moves should take 1/100th of a second.
Sort:
[COMMENT DELETED]
glamdring27 wrote:
EndgameStudier wrote:
SmyslovFan wrote:
I don't understand why someone should expect to win the game if they reach a theoretically winning position but only have one second left. The time control is known and agreed to in advance. If you want to win, make sure you have enough time left on the clock to deliver mate.
1/10 of a second per move is plenty of time, even in bullet.
But Pre-moves aren't designed to take any time, yet you still lose .1 seconds. This means if I have a mate in 15 and SEE IT, but we both only have 1 sec left, I'd still lose. If they are going to have pre-moves, they have to be instantaneous otherwise it defeats the purpose.
Clearly pre-moves are designed to take time!
This whole argument seems to be based around having 1s left on your clock. What did you do with all the rest of your time? And should you expect to be able to play 100 moves in 1s? Time management i a part of chess, even in bullet chess.
If a pre-move takes 0.01s then if you have the luxury of having 2 whole seconds left you can make 200 pre-moves, which is ridiculous!
you won't get close to 200 moves if your opponent is fast enough (or is doing the same)
the troubling thing is when you and your opponent are equal in time... but your opponent is up 1 millisecond, you lose in a position where you are COMPLETELY WINNING while your opponent has 0.00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 seconds but win s anyways!!!
[COMMENT DELETED]
EndgameStudier wrote:
Not necessarily, of both are pre-moving at the same time. I'm surprised the server on this site can handle it.
that's ALMOST impossible.
but they never actually get to make premoves, as soon as one stops (I've never seen a constant premoving game in my life for more than 10 moves.)
unless it's computers playing 
2 days so far without 0.01 sec premoves
... I had 0.1 seconds left and I premoved my queen to checkmate and the move was registered and on the analysis it said checkmate but I still got draw by time and insufficient material
Jan 19, 2019
0
#51
This game? https://www.chess.com/live/game/3389154587?username=tangentline
It might be you had 0.09 seconds left - enough to round up to display as 0.01 but not enough for a premove.
Or it might be that it checks to see if you ran out of time before it does the premove; someone who knows the code would have to confirm that.
Jan 19, 2019
0
#52
That sort of thing happens surprisingly often. The response I got was that it's due to lag.
Unless you're play a TIMED game
Jan 28, 2019
0
#54
EndgameStudier wrote:
and I resign in positions like this:
even if I have way more time than my opponent because I know he would win easily, even if he was only rated 1000, and it's not fair for me to claim and brag about a win cause he moves slightly slower.
I very much doubt someone below high level could premove their way to a win in that game. Besides, what you are moaning about is premoves taking up time. Premoves are not someone's chess skill anyway if they could keep making them.
If someone gets into a winning position without enough time on their clock to win the game in a reasonable fashion then they don't deserve to win. I could have won on position any number of games I actually won on time if I'd been as reckless with my time management as my opponent and used more time than I could afford to find better moves!
advance pre-move android 3 step dl Andriod specialist can V find dl in chess.com store u plus point Store 🏪 paid
certain server alignment on web resource available those compitier dampne our course disturb new clientele insight
Courtesy chess.com
glicko rd Tu rating & analyst for us
Regarding the positions with 3 queens and "black can just premove" - no, he cannot. Any move with your queen can reduce the number of available moves so much that almost every premove will fail.
Mar 12, 2021
0
#58
Has chess.com taken a poll of chess professionals about this? I bet the vast majority of chess professionals agree that .1 second is too much time for premoving. It should cost something, maybe .025 seconds. But .1 second is too draconian.
Mar 12, 2021
0
#59
SmyslovFan wrote:
Has chess.com taken a poll of chess professionals about this? I bet the vast majority of chess professionals agree that .1 second is too much time for premoving. It should cost something, maybe .025 seconds. But .1 second is too draconian.
I can't tell if this is serious, but I would happily support a change to one half or one quarter of 0.1 -- 10 moves per second is awfully costly when you need a few dozen moves to win.
I don't understand why someone should expect to win the game if they reach a theoretically winning position but only have one second left. The time control is known and agreed to in advance. If you want to win, make sure you have enough time left on the clock to deliver mate.
1/10 of a second per move is plenty of time, even in bullet.
But Pre-moves aren't designed to take any time, yet you still lose .1 seconds. This means if I have a mate in 15 and SEE IT, but we both only have 1 sec left, I'd still lose. If they are going to have pre-moves, they have to be instantaneous otherwise it defeats the purpose.
Clearly pre-moves are designed to take time!
This whole argument seems to be based around having 1s left on your clock. What did you do with all the rest of your time? And should you expect to be able to play 100 moves in 1s? Time management i a part of chess, even in bullet chess.
If a pre-move takes 0.01s then if you have the luxury of having 2 whole seconds left you can make 200 pre-moves, which is ridiculous!