I just played a Yahoo! Chess match about 15 min ago and while I mated my opponent, he tried his best to win... on time. My parents had me help out for about 5-7 min. I explained the situation to my opponent and excused myself from the game.
When I came back, I had just a bit more than 5 min on the clock. I asked for a draw and a rematch, despite knowing that my position was better and that I would lose rating points for it. (my opponent was starenggpk rated at 1300+, which is about 200 points less than me) Anyway, he refused and I continued. Then, the position clearly became better for me, but my time had run down to two min. I asked him to just resign because it is clearly not a winning position, but he refused and tried to win on time.
Here's the game up to when I asked him to just resign:
FEN: 2rq2k1/4p2p/3p1rpB/ppp2bN1/5P2/P2P4/5P1P/Q4RK1 b - - 0 24
So we battled it out until I mated him with 12 seconds on the clock. Now in my opinion, the guy was abusing the system and just being an asshole. The point of the rating system is to measure your skill not your ability to win on time in losing positions.
But what do you guys think about this kind of behavior?
Who cares, it's just a fun game on yahoo. You know you had him beat, he knows it so whatever. Ratings don't mean squat on yahoo.
I could get a 1600 rating easily on yahoo. Just keep playing in the beginner section and then go to advance and they would think i'm a 1600 player in advanced but really all my points came from beginner.
There are so many cheaters on yahoo who use computers. Its not even worth it playing on there. I played over 1500 games on there and then joined a chess club. The chess club help me improve way quickly and is more fun. If you want a better yahoo rating just use an engine like everyone else.
I know I have used fritz 8 when i first got it to see how strong it was on yahoo and guess what, I got my red rating thing after 20 some games. The only games I lost to were against people with fritz on a faster computer.
Originally posted by exigentsky I just played a Yahoo! Chess match about 15 min ago and while I mated my opponent, he tried his best to win... on time. My parents had me help out for about 5-7 min. I explained the situation to my opponent and excused myself from the game.
When I came back, I had just a bit more than 5 min on the clock. I asked for a draw and a rematch, despite knowi ...[text shortened]... to win on time in losing positions.
But what do you guys think about this kind of behavior?
Personally i think it's damn cheeky for you in the middle of a game to go help mum and dad for 5-7 mins come back then ask the other guy to resign, explain how the hell he's abusing the system?
A win is a win. Those were the rules you decided on.
Anyways, I know what you talking about. I lost lots of won games because I had to go say prayers and when I got back my time had run out. We gotta say prayers at a specific time, so I couldn't have sayed them after the game or anything.
Originally posted by RahimK A win is a win. Those were the rules you decided on.
Anyways, I know what you talking about. I lost lots of won games because I had to go say prayers and when I got back my time had run out. We gotta say prayers at a specific time, so I couldn't have sayed them after the game or anything.
Originally posted by leestatic Personally i think it's damn cheeky for you in the middle of a game to go help mum and dad for 5-7 mins come back then ask the other guy to resign, explain how the hell he's abusing the system?
I didn't ask him after I came back. That was after a few more moves.
Originally posted by caissad4 If time was not a factor in winning or losing why do we use time controls ?
Maybe you should use longer time controls.
Time controls are to limit average thinking time. Normally, no one loses on time because they adjust their thinking time. Thus time controls are meant to make games faster or slower and the amount of thinking per move for each player changes to match that. They are not meant to make a desperate player win on time and under normal circumstances that doesn't even happen.
Originally posted by exigentsky I asked him to resign because it was a totally lost position and he was just trying to beat me on time. I don't see how that's being an asshole. To prove that further, I still won the game anyway.
Then what are you crying about?? I lost two games on time in an OTB tourney even though the positions were drawn in theory. That's my fault, not my opponents'. Grow up; it's never good manners to ask your opponent to resign. If I was playing at an OTB tourney and someone insisted I resign because they didn't have much time left, I'd put my foot in his a**.
Originally posted by no1marauder Then what are you crying about?? I lost two games on time in an OTB tourney even though the positions were drawn in theory. That's my fault, not my opponents'. Grow up; it's never good manners to ask your opponent to resign. If I was playing at an OTB and someone asked me to resign, I'd put my foot in his a**.
Originally posted by no1marauder Then what are you crying about?? I lost two games on time in an OTB tourney even though the positions were drawn in theory. That's my fault, not my opponents'. Grow up; it's never good manners to ask your opponent to resign. If I was playing at an OTB tourney and someone insisted I resign because they didn't have much time left, I'd put my foot in his a**.
LOL, but it is IMO impolite to keep on playing a lost position just because your opponent is low on time, epecially when your opponent had to do something unplanned. If you'll notice, GMs almost always resign in lost positions instead of hoping for a time win. (Unlike an OTB tournament, I was forced to help my parents during the match.)
As for my complaint, it is more general, it's not about winning or losing for me. It's about the idea of desperately trying for a time win when you have clearly lost tactically, materially and positionally. Do you think it's polite?
Aiming for a Win on Time
05 Jan '06 06:12
Back to Top