I doubt that there are as many cheaters as some insist on thinking
And this is only who get caught.
that is more than I would have thought, but I still am not upset. If I get beat by a computer, it won't be the first time!
If you been quicker with your moves earlier in the game your opponent could not "flag" you. In this situation you are trying to "blame" your opponent for what is your own fault.
A player shouldn't be forced to 'guess' how long the game is going to be and then decide whether to make fast, unsound moves or to make slow, better moves based on that.
Nobody forced to guess anything. Before the game you don't know how long game going be, what opening your opponent will play, how much theory he knows, how much time you going to use, if game is open or closed, ect, ect.
You have resources: your pieces and your thinnking time. Your responsible for use these in best way you can. Your opponent has also same resourses. Else is unknown. Who will use his resources the best, the result of the game decides. If you lose on time, clearly you failed to use this resource in the best way.
You are making the assumption in your post that to achieve a won game on the board is more worthy than achieve a won game on the clock. This is your mistake.
Good points. But, just to make sure, you are not saying that winning a game on the clock is more worthy than winning on the board, right? They are both equally important.
Its like you get free pawn when you about to get checkmated.
That would be an AWESOME rule.
Yeah I agree, if your opponent wins on time it means he played moves of satisfactory quality not to lose and it took him less time, which means he's probably a better player than you. And a won game is a won game, for whatever reason.
But I think in a chess game a player's chess ability should be more important than how fast their hands can move. Your point about time managment is correct, but what if both players had 10 seconds left on their clock with no increment - the game would probably be decided by who's hands are quicker, rather than who's the better player.
I think I should say here: I personally don't care if people cheat. Perhaps I have played against someone who used an engine. I don't know.
But, I do know, if I did, and I lost, than I learned something from the game.
So who's the real winner there?
Its never a loss if you learn something new.
30 minute games for me. I suck at blitz games and figure that I'll get better at them when my board reading skills get up to scratch. 30 min games i'm 1260, but blitz im not breaking 900!!!
Well in my opinion it is better to be great at standard then blitz ! :)
30 minute games for me. I suck at blitz games and figure that I'll get better at them when my board reading skills get up to scratch.
This is correct.
And why is that ?
Much like playing a musical instrument, you have to start slow to learn to play it right.
I think if you check around, you will find that most high rated blitz players are also quite good at longer time controls.
Opponent 1 minute....Me 1 hour.
Has this time control ever actually helped you win?
Couldnt aggree more. Strong long time control players are good at blitz because they have the main lines of everything on the top of theire heads.
0|0 is the best
No clocks and chess with a friend or something like that is also fun I guess.
I prefer the FIDE time 90 minutes + 30 sec increment in real life. I don't have much patience and those slower longer time controls kinda put me off.
Online I do prefer 2/1, 3/0 or 24 hour pr move. I've really starting liking online chess long games! And barely pay live anymore.
It is interesting that people are talking about increments as opposed to delay for OTB chess. Online, we see increments, but in the US, most tournaments use delay(at least every one that I have played in), not increment. (The difference being that with delay, you clock time can never INCREASE as is can with increment. A 5 second delay means that after your opponent hits the clock, your clock does not being again for 5 seconds.)
What about the rest of the world?
True, over the board is better.