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

Help Forum

  1. 19 May '09 09:36 / 1 edit
    I am playing someone called Phil Cross, who is losing badly, when he comes on now he plays everyone else many times a day, and just runs down the time with our game until he HAS to make a move.
    This is so frustrating when I could be playing someone who wants to play chess
  2. 19 May '09 10:47
    Originally posted by tootsie
    I am playing someone called Phil Cross, who is losing badly, when he comes on now he plays everyone else many times a day, and just runs down the time with our game until he HAS to make a move.
    The best way of preventing this is, before you accept a game always check what time controls are proposed, and only accept if you are willing to agree to them. For example, I don't take on games with a longer time bank than 7 days for the reason you give, but take a 3 day timeout as although I usually move at least once a day, sometimes I have to miss a day, for example at bank holidays.
  3. 19 May '09 12:48
    Yes, but the point is if he did not come on at all, that would be fair enough, but to come on and play others but leave me out is what I am complaing about.
    In truth, officially he has not run out of time.
  4. 19 May '09 14:58 / 1 edit
    I see the problem is resolved as Phil Cross has resigned, but, as you admit, he was still within the time limits to which you in effect agreed when you took the game on. Really I was trying to show how you can avoid this sort of behaviour in future if you find it annoying. Perhaps his other games were with shorter time limits and he had to play moves in them or be timed out.
  5. Subscriber Ponderableonline
    chemist
    19 May '09 20:17
    In fact the phenomenon is well knwon and discussed.

    * It is bad sprortsmanship

    * One can't do anything against this.

    * If you subscribe you can laugh about this behaviour.

    * I have one game in which I only move when necessary since it is a sandbagger.
  6. 20 May '09 09:48 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Ponderable
    In fact the phenomenon is well knwon and discussed.

    * It is bad sprortsmanship

    * One can't do anything against this.

    * If you subscribe you can laugh about this behaviour.

    * I have one game in which I only move when necessary since it is a sandbagger.
    My thanks to Essex & Ponderable for your excellent replies.

    The main reason I took Phil on was that he was an "All Day Player" and the same timezone as me UK. I then assumed (wrongly) it would be a fast-ish game.
    Looking back with hindsight, I have to ask myself, why does an "All Day Player" want 3days/7days playing times, this is where I went wrong, I will only take players with a 1 Day play from now on.

    You live & learn.

    P.S. I have just checked Phil's last few games and guess what, he lost on the 2nd May and 23rd March to "Timeouts" LOL. A true Sandbagger beware.
  7. Subscriber Kewpie
    chess dummy
    20 May '09 14:43
    Most subscribers use the 3/7 because it is the default, not necessarily because they want to play at that speed. The kind of individual who slows right down when he's losing is a poor sport but it isn't a banning offence to be a poor sport. You can check an individual's habits: click his name to get his profile and a list of his games, then check the "info" on individual games to see when they were created. If you look at his finished games list you may see a lot of timeouts - win or lose, these are a bad sign.