Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Help Forum

Help Forum

  1. 27 Jun '12 18:28
    game id 9203682

    i've tried to talk to my clan about this, but we're small and not very talkative so here I am. i began thinking of this game as an instance of cheating, but, since the site allows what occurred, maybe it's more of an instance of what i'd consider "cheap strategy".

    My opponent was down 2 pieces, was not going to win. so he started a series of moves that led nowhere, it was an aggressive check to my king but he didn't have any pieces to back it up to turn it into a checkmate. i saw it and dismissed it as weak strategy. but he checked me, i moved, he checked me again, and just kept repeating this move pattern that he was the instigator of. i could not "escape" it. I even commented in the game, suggesting he try another strategy, let's see something different, etc. he ignored this comment, and claimed the draw after he forced several repeats of this move. i did not even realize you could do this until after I investigated this suddenly "drawn" game.

    i think now he was doing it on purpose, and it irritates me. it makes me feel like playing a game of chess is basically worthless, since anytime you lose some pieces and are going to lose, you can engineer this type of draw and claim it. that doesn't seem like "fair" play, and it certainly isn't very interesting play.

    what's the word on this from RHP, re: playing style and rules? is this a loop-hole to the site game logic? less seriously, can i get an overturn and claim a win for this game? even less seriously, can I get the player banned?

    i enjoy chess, whether i win or lose. but games like this where people employ such strategy makes me want to give up and stop playing.

    Any info would be appreciated. Thanks!
    ,Y
  2. Standard member gambit05
    Mad Murdock
    27 Jun '12 18:50
    Originally posted by Yroyathon
    game id 9203682

    i've tried to talk to my clan about this, but we're small and not very talkative so here I am. i began thinking of this game as an instance of cheating, but, since the site allows what occurred, maybe it's more of an instance of what i'd consider "cheap strategy".

    My opponent was down 2 pieces, was not going to win. so he started a ...[text shortened]... ant to give up and stop playing.

    Any info would be appreciated. Thanks!
    ,Y
    I am sure you will get a lot of responses (in short: you are wrong your oppenent is right). I'll just have to leave to see the "soccer" game Spain-Portugal.
  3. Standard member RevRSleeker
    CerebrallyChallenged
    27 Jun '12 20:35 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Yroyathon
    game id 9203682

    i've tried to talk to my clan about this, but we're small and not very talkative so here I am. i began thinking of this game as an instance of cheating, but, since the site allows what occurred, maybe it's more of an instance of what i'd consider "cheap strategy".

    My opponent was down 2 pieces, was not going to win. so he started a ant to give up and stop playing.

    Any info would be appreciated. Thanks!
    ,Y
    We all make errors, your error was INVITING your opponents tactic...he played for the draw by repetition and it was one that paid off in a game that was all but lost for him. Don't chastise him for doing so, he didn't break any rule nor any convention..he played THE game and you will learn from this experience.
    Below is the said game, however you'll see that 23...c6 has been omitted for Qd5, which to all intents and purposes it effectively negates White's 'last hope'....

  4. 27 Jun '12 20:46 / 1 edit
    Sorry but if you lose a game due to ignorance of the rules, then it is only your own fault for not studying the rules of the game thoroughly before starting to play it.

    Better luck next time and don't make the same mistake again.
  5. 27 Jun '12 20:50
    This topic comes up once every few months. If you are not familiar with all the rules of chess, including draws, see the faq under the help menu above.

    A draw by three-fold repetition of position is part of the game, both here at RHP and the chess world in general. It is harder to do than you imply, I have used it maybe 2 or 3 times to rescue a draw, but failed to pull it off probably 25 times.

    To suggest your opponent could not win is incorrect, he had the material to do so. Of course it is silly to suggest reversing the outcome or banning the opponent. You are in the wrong here and, frankly, your post was a show of poor sportsmanship.
  6. Standard member RevRSleeker
    CerebrallyChallenged
    27 Jun '12 22:47
    Not too harsh on him chaps, I say hats off to him for being so open about his emotions and posting them here...we've all been desperate and actively looking for what his opposition achieved, and yes it is a CHEAP draw lol... and not knowing otherwise you may find such tactics quite infuriating...we're all learning, no matter what the level !!
  7. Subscriber Kewpie
    chess dummy
    27 Jun '12 23:47
    Draws are in this situation are an indication that neither player is capable of winning the game. He can't win because of lack of material. You can't win because you can't beat a perpetual check situation. That's why the repetition draw rule exists.
    In the same vein is stalemate, where king is not in check but can't move because he would move into check. One player may have all the pieces, but if he's not left any move for his opponent to make it has to be a draw.
  8. Standard member Phlabibit
    Mystic Meg
    28 Jun '12 02:21
    Originally posted by Yroyathon
    game id 9203682

    i've tried to talk to my clan about this, but we're small and not very talkative so here I am. i began thinking of this game as an instance of cheating, but, since the site allows what occurred, maybe it's more of an instance of what i'd consider "cheap strategy".

    My opponent was down 2 pieces, was not going to win. so he started a ...[text shortened]... ant to give up and stop playing.

    Any info would be appreciated. Thanks!
    ,Y
    Ha!
  9. Standard member ChessPraxis
    Cowboy From Hell
    28 Jun '12 12:01
    Originally posted by Yroyathon
    game id 9203682

    i've tried to talk to my clan about this, but we're small and not very talkative so here I am. i began thinking of this game as an instance of cheating, but, since the site allows what occurred, maybe it's more of an instance of what i'd consider "cheap strategy".

    My opponent was down 2 pieces, was not going to win. so he started a ...[text shortened]... ant to give up and stop playing.

    Any info would be appreciated. Thanks!
    ,Y
    If you play into a perpetual check, you are not winning.
  10. Subscriber Kewpie
    chess dummy
    28 Jun '12 12:38
    There's another point. In clan games, you have an obligation to win (or at least draw) by any legal possible moves. You have the luxury in "friendly" games of choosing not to use things like perpetual check and repetition against your opponent, but in clan games you're obligated to do absolutely the best you can for your clan.
  11. Standard member Phlabibit
    Mystic Meg
    28 Jun '12 13:12
    Originally posted by RevRSleeker
    Not too harsh on him chaps, I say hats off to him for being so open about his emotions and posting them here...we've all been desperate and actively looking for what his opposition achieved, and yes it is a CHEAP draw lol... and not knowing otherwise you may find such tactics quite infuriating...we're all learning, no matter what the level !!
    How is it a 'cheap tactic'? Though the game ends in draw I'd say it is a win for the player who forced the draw down a piece. Nothing cheap about it, it's like saying The Art of War is filled with 'cheap tactics'.
  12. 28 Jun '12 16:13
    thanks for all the quick info everybody. (my clan is still incommunicado) i'll re-read the past/future comments again and again to make sure it all sinks in.

    i accept that this draw tactic is within the rules of the game, this website, or both. (part of me wonders, how far back this particular rule goes historically, I'll do some reading)

    I guess the source of my opinion that this is cheap strategy is that, in this scenario, you have given up all hope of winning the game. In any game I have given up all hope of winning the game, I resign. I cannot win, and I respect my opponent enough to not waste his/her time. I've made mistakes and lost pieces that led me to an absence of hope of winning, and there is a natural consequence of this called losing, I accept the responsibility here and lose. I don't try to dodge my loss by shooting for a technical draw, where my goal is no longer to win yet still i play on. There are certain situations where two players are so evenly matched where I think a draw is appropriate (or the only solution, as in kings chasing each other around a board). The game ends well, with two players deciding that yes, we are evenly matched, in a reasonable amount of time we cannot decide who is better in this game. For me, that is what a draw is for, my stylistic interpretation of a basic part of the game.

    The aforementioned draw is nothing like this. It is not mutually consensual, it is not based on a near perfect balance in skill/success-wthin-game between two players. It is a failure in imagination of finding a way to win, possibly when you are down. It is a loophole, which I think is stupid, and it cheapens the great game of chess.

    Opinions vary, though.

    I'm sure there are dozens (hundreds?) of way to get someone into a repetitive series of moves which ends in a draw. Is that really the kind of game of chess you want to play with someone? What if everybody stopped trying to win games in chess, if on the first move and thereafter their main objective was to try and draw the game? What a huge waste of time.

    I came here to play some great games of chess, to match my meager wits to someone else's, to show off some moves I've learned and win, or to be murdered by even better moves that I'll try to use next time. Even draws can and do occur, I'll often rematch someone like that because the games get really interesting.

    But this 4th category, this loss-avoidance auto-draw-seeking type of "play", I hope to never encounter again, as it is the least interesting thing I can imagine in the context of a game of chess.

    ,Y
  13. Standard member Phlabibit
    Mystic Meg
    28 Jun '12 16:22 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Yroyathon
    thanks for all the quick info everybody. (my clan is still incommunicado) i'll re-read the past/future comments again and again to make sure it all sinks in.

    i accept that this draw tactic is within the rules of the game, this website, or both. (part of me wonders, how far back this particular rule goes historically, I'll do some reading)

    I guess t is the least interesting thing I can imagine in the context of a game of chess.

    ,Y
    Ah, but wait until you are behind and can force a draw... it's a thrilling feeling. Chess is like war, if you can sink your enemies ships in harbor or bomb their planes on the runway do you think, "No, that wouldn't be nice, what a cheap thing to do".

    The other player forced a draw in a game you could have won. There is NOTHING cheap about it and it isn't some new rule or something. Forcing a draw comes up often enough that you might want to reconsider your view, because the object of the game is not only to win, but to also not get beat.

    If someone hangs a queen, is it cheap to take it? Obviously they didn't see the position properly. Do you message them pointing out their error and resign the game because you were down a rook in the game? Or do you take the Queen? There is nothing cheap within the rules of chess, paying attention and learning are important, and using every advantage at your disposal.

    P-
  14. 28 Jun '12 16:48 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Yroyathon
    thanks for all the quick info everybody. (my clan is still incommunicado) i'll re-read the past/future comments again and again to make sure it all sinks in.

    i accept that this draw tactic is within the rules of the game, this website, or both. (part of me wonders, how far back this particular rule goes historically, I'll do some reading)

    I guess t is the least interesting thing I can imagine in the context of a game of chess.

    ,Y
    Hey dude. It's in the rules so get over it. Someone mentioned earlier that you sounded like a sore loser and you do.

    If you don't like the rules take up another game like tiddly winks or snakes and ladders.
  15. Standard member Phlabibit
    Mystic Meg
    28 Jun '12 17:37
    Ah, you may want to change your profile and omit this line: "I like learning new offensive moves."

    Perpetual check is one of the strongest offensive moves, turning a lost game into a draw.

    Also, have you ever heard of stalemate? You better study up on that because I don't want to hear more complaining in the future about a game you 'should have won'.

    P-