request for fair games

Hi, colleagues.

I don't know who will read this.
I observed that most players, when it is absolutely lost, play on nerves and play one move every three days, or every twelve hours if it is a fast game.
Let's go back to honour and against mediocracy. When you feel the wind ot unavoidable defeat, please accelerate the resign, and make another gair game. Many thanks.

I don't resign unless it is a absolutely hopeless position for me. I have come from more than a rook back twice in my high school matches. Sure I had a little help from my oponent, but still I try until it is absolutely over. But I do see what you mean.

If I only had 6 games max, as non-subs have, I see the annoyance with slow opponents and opponents not giving up as fast as you want them to.

I am a sub, giving me the right to have as many games going as I want. So I don't care if my opponents are using all their time before giving up. I even like them not giving up, even if the game is a clear loss. I like to check mate.

But I am annoyed by opponents trying to make me give up games that in their view are lost, and trying to make me play faster despite the time limits, that's opponents I'm annoyed with. But thanks to Russ et al, giving us the possibility to put them on ones ignore list, the problem is not too grave.

If you want to play quick games, just use the 1/0 thinking time and the problem is solved. Don't accept 21/21 if you're not willing to play 21/21.

Be a sub, and start so many games so you always have games to play. It's not that expensive.

Originally posted by Schopenhauer
Hi, colleagues.

I don't know who will read this.
I observed that most players, when it is absolutely lost, play on nerves and play one move every three days, or every twelve hours if it is a fast game.
Let's go back to honour and against mediocracy. When you feel the wind ot unavoidable defeat, please accelerate the resign, and make another gair game. Many thanks.

I agree with you completely. It's correspondence chess people, you can't count on multiple stupid blunders to throw you back into a game. If your down a full piece with no compensation, I find it rude to not resign. Don't assume a blunder.

On the other hand, maybe we should just go member and this wouldn't be a problem.

Originally posted by ih8sens
you can't count on multiple stupid blunders to throw you back into a game. If your down a full piece with no compensation, I find it rude to not resign. Don't assume a blunder.

Game 3026177 If I would have resigned, I would have lost a ton of rating points that I didn't need to lose. Also, seeing this game makes me feel happier knowing i've never blundered such a winning position away. He must have been pissed.

Originally posted by hammster21
Game 3026177 If I would have resigned, I would have lost a ton of rating points that I didn't need to lose. Also, seeing this game makes me feel happier knowing i've never blundered such a winning position away. He must have been pissed.

Isn't Knight and Bishop v. King a draw?

The point is, a lost position is lost, sure there's always a chance of a comeback, but it's unlikely. I don't remember the last time a grandmaster played 'till mate. There's a reason for that.

I just finished a game a couple days ago where I had a completely won position but stupidly created a staltemate out of it. I think players who don't give up when their situation is hopeless hope they can stretch out a lucky wins, especially if they see their opponent isn't rated so high.

Here is the game in question
Game 3439321

Originally posted by ih8sens
Isn't Knight and Bishop v. King a draw?

The point is, a lost position is lost, sure there's always a chance of a comeback, but it's unlikely. I don't remember the last time a grandmaster played 'till mate. There's a reason for that.

No its a win for the N & B.

see Thread 57677 on how to do it.

People have the right to take as much time as they like. I rarely resign early. If you want to play more games, then subscribe. If you want people to move faster, make smaller time constraints. You can't expect someone to hurry up and lose. I mean, unless it is like K+R vs. K or K+Q vs. K.

Originally posted by Schopenhauer
Hi, colleagues.

I don't know who will read this.
I observed that most players, when it is absolutely lost, play on nerves and play one move every three days, or every twelve hours if it is a fast game.
Let's go back to honour and against mediocracy. When you feel the wind ot unavoidable defeat, please accelerate the resign, and make another gair game. Many thanks.

Why? THere is always the opportunity your opponent may time out.

A win is a win is a win.

Subscribe and plays loads of games.

Time is determined by the time bank. If someone takes too long, time them out. Otherwise they are merely playing the game you agreed to, and there is nothing wrong with that at all.

Originally posted by ih8sens
I agree with you completely. It's correspondence chess people, you can't count on multiple stupid blunders to throw you back into a game. If your down a full piece with no compensation, I find it rude to not resign. Don't assume a blunder.

On the other hand, maybe we should just go member and this wouldn't be a problem.

I'm sorry but you are both completely wrong.

Even in cc chess you can fight back from a rook down and win games if you really put the effort in, especially if you are playing against an opponent at the 1600 or below level.
Remember, whats the point in being a rook ahead if you can't move it and get it into the game.
Also, when behind lost causes can be saved by searching really hard for PINS, TRAPS and SACRIFICES that both players may not normally consider.
Or even trying ideas like throwing all your pieces at the king in an unexpected fashion can result in quick turnarounds.

Its every players right to continue and often quite a challenge to try and claw back points. Its also quite a skill for a player to try and play for a stalemate.

Players at the IM or GM level may well resign when a big piece down because they have such an advanced understanding of the positional play of a game that its very unlikely an equally matchesd opponent will fall for a pin unless you can find something 8 moves deep etc...
But if you're playing someone on this site less than 2000, I'd almost always continue, probably play slower and search for something.

The time controls are there to stop games running indefinately, so if it is a problem for you then as mentioned elsewhere in this thread, maybe avoid 7/7, 7/14 or 14/14 games.

I can understand it being frustrating for non-subscribers as you only have a 6 game max, but if it frustrates you so much then subscribe and play as many games as you like.

Don't play CC if your not patient enough to win. It is not good practice to quit when you're down. Just about all of us have came back from a losing position. Even if mathematically your down in pieces doesn't mean you can't pull a draw or even a win. Should a player with just a lone king always resign when faced with a King, Knight and Bishop? Hell no..

Originally posted by Rooney Once a Blue
I'm sorry but you are both completely wrong.

Even in cc chess you can fight back from a rook down and win games if you really put the effort in, especially if you are playing against an opponent at the 1600 or below level.
Remember, whats the point in being a rook ahead if you can't move it and get it into the game.
Also, when behind lost c ...[text shortened]... ame max, but if it frustrates you so much then subscribe and play as many games as you like.

1600....uh try 1200 and below maybe...

Originally posted by Schopenhauer
Hi, colleagues.

I don't know who will read this.
I observed that most players, when it is absolutely lost, play on nerves and play one move every three days, or every twelve hours if it is a fast game.
Let's go back to honour and against mediocracy. When you feel the wind ot unavoidable defeat, please accelerate the resign, and make another gair game. Many thanks.

😉