Go back
Time-out settings

Time-out settings

Site Ideas


I think when your opponent has only a king and claims a time-out, it should be a draw

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Chandradi
I think when your opponent has only a king and claims a time-out, it should be a draw
maybe so, but there has to be some incentive to move games along, mainly for tournaments and clans and leagues . . . It's irritating to watch hopeless games lag a tournament and clan matches.

Vote Up
Vote Down

I agree


I think you should time out less often, even when your opponent only has a King left 😕

Vote Up
Vote Down

If you were fool enough not to move in the alloted time then you deserve to lose on timeout

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Chandradi
I think when your opponent has only a king and claims a time-out, it should be a draw
Yes, the rest of the chess world has the rules this way. RHP Blitz server has the insufficient material rule [I played a game just last night, and the game was automatically ruled drawn by the server immediately after we got to K+N vs. K].

It's time for RHP corr server to follow suit.

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

At the least, the most common three cases should be programmed.

King versus King
King and Knight versus King
King and Bishop versus King

All such positions should be immediately declared drawn.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by SwissGambit
At the least, the most common three cases should be programmed.

King versus King
King and Knight versus King
King and Bishop versus King

All such positions should be immediately declared drawn.
I agree but this wimp had sufficient material so possible mate or stalemate so his own stupidity

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Mctayto
I agree but this wimp had sufficient material so possible mate or stalemate so his own stupidity
I'm a big fan of enforcing time controls, but I don't think a player ought to be given a win by clock in a position that they could never win over-the-board, even with the most helpful/inept opponent.

Vote Up
Vote Down

yes

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by SwissGambit
I'm a big fan of enforcing time controls, but I don't think a player ought to be given a win by clock in a position that they could never win over-the-board, even with the most helpful/inept opponent.
If your opponent can't be bothered to move then I totally disagree, simply because he thought he had it won he sat on his hands - deserved the skulling

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Mctayto
If your opponent can't be bothered to move then I totally disagree, simply because he thought he had it won he sat on his hands - deserved the skulling
I have no issue with the skulling. By all means, allow the skull to be claimed. Just make the result a draw.

The guy with the won game still loses something - he only gets a draw, not a win.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by SwissGambit
I have no issue with the skulling. By all means, allow the skull to be claimed. Just make the result a draw.

The guy with the won game still loses something - he only gets a draw, not a win.
"To be skulled is to be lost" - anonymous

...and I agree. Time management is a part of the game.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Not if a king only.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Chandradi
Not if a king only.
The forces of public opinion are against you 😉