I always time out if they challenged me and didn't stick to the time, or if it's a 0 timeout with timebank tournament, since at that point, i've struggled to keep within the total time limit, and they've let it slip.
Originally posted by coentje just claim it, if they cannot be bothered to move in the agreed time why would you have to wait for them.
I guess it depends on whether your opponent is constantly letting his time expire, or whether it is a one-time thing. In a recent game, my opponent timed me out in an interesting (and I think equal) position. I almost always play on time, and in this one case, the I had to let the timer expire because I was travelling and flights got delayed (and there was no reserve).
While I think my opponent was within his rights to time me out, I feel that it was a bit pointless. Whatever rating increase he got will surely get readjusted after a few games. And he just managed to abandon an interesting game - I mean why bother if you don't really want to play out the interesting positions.
I time out opponents only if they have not played for a long time after the time expires, or they have obviously lost the game and are refusing to resign and let the time expire.
Originally posted by ngkabra I guess it depends on whether your opponent is constantly letting his time expire, or whether it is a one-time thing. In a recent game, my opponent timed me out in an interesting (and I think equal) position. I almost always play on time, and in this one case, the I had to let the timer expire because I was travelling and flights got delayed (and there was ...[text shortened]... pires, or they have obviously lost the game and are refusing to resign and let the time expire.
Does not make a difference to me at all. If the time set at the beginning is not long enough for them they should have played a slower pace. Like 21/21 or something like that.
If they have their vacation flag set with a return date I Will not time them out. For the other games i will time every single one out, No matter if my position is lost or won, no matter if my opinion is a friend or a stranger. If you're time is up you lose your game against me.
I used to let people go if over the time limit. But because of practical experience, I am becoming more and more reluctant to let it go. If my opponent writes and says there are special circumstances...that's another matter. Generally, if your opponent oversteps once, they'll do it again...and again...You are perfectly within your rights to time someone out without guilt. That doesn't mean you have to. It's up to you and you alone. And woe unto those who criticize that right.
Dont timeout wins count 1/2 as much as resignations and checkmates?
I have looked at my own graphs and other's profile graphs and I swear I see ppl at roughly the same rating defeat two opponents also of similar rank to one another, and the game in which the T/O was claimed garnished only 7 pts whereas a resignation in another game of a player with the lower rating (though by only a few pts) garnished a shift of 13 pts.
I didnt see it say that anywhere on the FAQ, but I have seen it on profile charts.
So if you are going to win anyway and it isnt a game with a super long t/o then Id just keep playing until you mate him or he resigns.
You shouldnt ever feel bad about timing someone out who is negligent though. Someone puts up an open invite for a 1/0 and they dont move on time, that's their tough luck.
Timed a guy out who had that invite up along with a "1 day game, finish tonight" message attached. I played pretty fast, fast enough to finish in the night, then he has to leave and the game moves along painfully slow for the next couple-3 days and he times out by 6 hours while in check, so I claimed that skull.
But obviously it is situational. I will generally at least give my opponent 4-8 hours after timing out to claim, just to give em that extra chance.
If you mutually agree of a 3/7 thinking time - why change that agreement when the time is out?
When I play OTB tournament or Blitz or whatever - then I 'skull' him as fast as I can. Why not here?
Keeping the thinking time is a part of the game. If not - why have time limits at all?
Everyone would be much happier in the long run if they regarded skulls like a flag fall in OTB chess. Your flag falls, you lose. No contoversy, disappointment or ongoing debate
Originally posted by ChessJester Someone took a timeout victory on me in this game:
Game 2154159
And now I can take one one someone else in this game:
Game 2167497
But I don't know if I will... cuz I'm gonna win anyway 😛
if im going to win anyways, i will always take the time out with no remorse, because essentialy they may have resiegned (someone from my school refused to move because i had the game won)
Yea, im beginning to think skulls (timeouts) should be automatic. If there is something more important than making a move, like attending a funeral or other personal problem, i hardly think losing a game at RHP would be significant. You lose the game and get on with your life. I don't think these endless discussions about should i or shouldn't i are worth the effort. I mean losing a chessgame is the least of our worries in the grand scheme of things.
To claim or not to claim?
25 Jun '06 16:48
Back to Top