takeback

they should give the option of a takeback where one player might request the takeback from another and if he accepts then they can have the last move taken back. And there should be a 3 limit to the amount of takebacks so someone cant continuosly ask for a takeback after they're requests get rejected. the 3 limit rule should apply to draws to unless the other person asks for a draw

Takebacks change the fundamental nature of the game. In turn-based chess, they've been introduced without any limitations - EXCEPT that the game is unrated.

i mean  if like someone totally blows a queen the other guy might want to get a *legit* game so he would accept the takeback and let the other guy have a chance

There have been many discussions about it - including this one ... taking-back-a-move.

If someone claimed that their mouse slipped and THAT was why they gave away their queen, would you feel obliged to let them take the move back?

if they r my friends then ya

Then play unrated games with your friends and take back all the moves you want.

Takebacks are stupid.

That's the takeNAback button.

Provided you could prove to your opponent beyond reasonable doubt that the mouseslip was genuine - and the rules of chess were amended to allow it.

One can not take back moves in chess. Chess is touch move. Laid is played.

It has provided a specific takeback mode, ideal for training, although there is no history of taken back moves.

Everyone, AFAIK. (Turn-based only)

For sites which allow takebacks, I usually just don't give and don't receive. I have to be in a very strange mood for me to do something else.

Now.. for training purposes.. here, I had a training game once, with takebacks. At some point it went from training game to annoying game. I didn't know my opponent well enough, clearly. See, in a sense, you need both players' permission to actually end the game. Because if one player (my opponent) doesn't want to resign, they can just take things back until an earlier point.

The only way I was able to end the game (obviously resigning was always an option) was to takeback moves all the way to the start... (and then abort, I think). What was interesting about that was that the entire game was then lost, with all comments and everything. My opponent tried to continue the game well past when I was ok with it, and ended up with no game (no record to go read later). Such is life.

I would grant a take-back for an obvious mouse-slip every time.  I would deny one every other time.

Problem is, though, that I don't think you'd want take-back games in the rated pool of games.

I think it would be interesting, though, if rather than request a takeback, they could only be offered.

 Depends on the situation. In an unrated game (I disagree with takebacks in rated games, as is thjis possible in OTB rated?), if opne loses the queen due to a four move long combination, I wouldn't let my opponent takeback. If it was an obvious move, let's say the queen is under attack but one player moves the pawn next to it, takeback should be allowed. But, an additional requirement, the game has to be among friends, as I don't think people you don't know would be that obliging. Despite my "approva", I truly believe that people should just look at the board, make their move, and check their move to see if it's desired vbefore mindlessly clicking the "submit move" button. If people did that, nobody would complain. It's easier than OTB, since OTB has touch move, too.