Move Timeouts

I think that if a player is going to violate the move timeout, he or she
should let the opponent know whether or not to hold the game. Some
players simply stop playing or abandon a game, and the opponent
does not know what to do. I usually just claim the win. But I had one
player become angry with me when I took the victory. He had not told
me to hold the game. He made no attempt to communicate with me
prior to the timeout. Move timeouts happen too often. I wish that all
players would observe the timeout rule and finish what they start.

One way I hear "move time out" is that you will risk losing the game
at your opponent's descretion. It is not the problem of the "on-time"
player. Everyone knows the rules and the potential to lose a game
that way. Having said that, if my opponent asks me for an extension
I am happy to do that and I respect their asking. Communication is
the key.

Well this is my situation with a game I was playing with
Anthonyrawchess, he advised me he was leaving to go on a vacation 7
days ago and our game timed out yesterday. I received the message
asking me to either send a notification or take the win. I'm fairly new
to this site and I do not know how I could have sent my opponent a
notification or how to hold the game until he came back. Believe me
when I say I felt bad taking a freebie. Reading kirksey957's reply I
had no idea about extensions. Sorry Anthonyrawchess!

Time is simply another parameter of the game not unlike material or
position. An "err" in time management should be punished no
differently than a positional error or loss of material (without
compensation). It reminds me of an old friend of mine that I used to
play allot of "over-the-board" blitz chess with (5 minutes each for all
of your moves). On certain occasions, he would have the "better
game" yet lose on time. He would invariably want to do a "post-
mortem analysis" on these positions where he had the upper hand
(just as we would post-mortem analyze our tournament games). I
don't know how many of you are into blitz chess, but there was a time
when I couldn't get enough of it. I would sometimes joke that blitz is
like the "crack cocaine" of chess. It is fast, furious, and highly
addictive. As one starts to get more proficient at this type of chess,
you become aware of several "devices" that are not so pressing in
slow chess but are crucial in blitz, such as: "the fake out" the
maneuver can be described as follows: your opponent is considering a
particular move (as evidenced by where his eyes are looking or by his
hand being close to a particular piece, etc) and you have worked out
and calculated a very good answer to that move (should your
opponent make the one he is considering) you don't want to give him
any indication as to the "answer" that you have worked out (since he
obviously has not yet worked it out himself or he would not be
considering the move that he is) so what you do is "pretend" to be
ready to make a move (again, should your opponent make the move
that he is considering) that will make his move very strong. You must
select your "blunder" carefully as well, for if it is too obvious your
opponent will catch the play and look deeper into the position likely
finding the "answer" and selecting a better move to make. This all
occurs in milliseconds in high level blitz. It might sound like a childish
ploy to some, but I have even seen it done at the grandmaster level.
This variety of the game is very dependant on intuition and knowing
your opponent much more than in slow chess. That was just one
example. There are also times when your game is hopeless and now
you must either win on time or have your opponent make a decisive
blunder, you will deliberately make what you know to be an "inferior"
move because it is a move such that your opponent will take longer to
convert his advantage, thus increasing your chances of winning on
time. This skill is a bit of a game in itself. I now I am going on a bit
of a tangent about all this blitz stuff but I thought some of you might
be interested.