Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Tournaments Forum

Tournaments Forum

  1. 30 Jan '08 06:07
    Hi,

    Have a look at Game http://www.redhotpawn.com/gameanalysis/boardhistory.php?gameid=4308057

    Black, who can mate in 1 move, resigns? What's going on here???
  2. 30 Jan '08 07:04
    Originally posted by Anton1959
    Hi,

    Have a look at Game http://www.redhotpawn.com/gameanalysis/boardhistory.php?gameid=4308057

    Black, who can mate in 1 move, resigns? What's going on here???
    The game ended on a timeout, not a resignation.
  3. 30 Jan '08 07:26
    AussieG (playing white in this one) normally resigns when mate is inevitable, even if it's 5 moves away...

    You're right, it's a time-out that ended the game, still... Winning this one had AussieG moving into the next round

    Whatever, gonna have fun beating him again now...
  4. Standard member RDM
    30 Jan '08 15:15 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by Anton1959
    Hi,

    Have a look at Game http://www.redhotpawn.com/gameanalysis/boardhistory.php?gameid=4308057

    Black, who can mate in 1 move, resigns? What's going on here???
    Game 4308057
  5. Standard member RDM
    30 Jan '08 15:19
    Well - first of all ...

    To time someone out under those circumstances smacks of collusion.

    Or poor sportsmanship.

    Make sure you beat that chap because that's just not right.

    I have book marked the games to watch with interest.
  6. 30 Jan '08 17:27
    Originally posted by RDM
    Well - first of all ...
    To time someone out under those circumstances smacks of collusion.
    Or poor sportsmanship.
    Not being able to manage ones time is as losing as not being able to manage ones king. Why do we have thinking times for if not as an element of the game?
  7. Standard member RDM
    30 Jan '08 22:21
    Well I wouldn't time someone out in those circumstances. He's lost the game fair and square and then just times the guy out.

    I think that sucks.

    I suppose he thinks he's fantastic for "winning" the game but I think he is just a bad sport.
  8. 30 Jan '08 22:39
    Originally posted by RDM
    Well I wouldn't time someone out in those circumstances. He's lost the game fair and square and then just times the guy out.

    I think that sucks.

    I suppose he thinks he's fantastic for "winning" the game but I think he is just a bad sport.
    Time is an element of the game, an important one, in OTB as well as in CC. If you can't handle the time, then you can't handle the game. That's the rule, and it's all right by me.

    Like the stalemate. Some people think it is unfair and not sportmanship to collect a draw out of a stalemate when inferior in material. Same reason here. It's a part of the game, that's the rule.

    Sucks or not, ask FIDE to change the rules. If they agree, then you have my vote, rules always rule.
  9. 30 Jan '08 23:48 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by FabianFnas
    Time is an element of the game, an important one, in OTB as well as in CC. If you can't handle the time, then you can't handle the game. That's the rule, and it's all right by me.
    You're absolutely right, in saying 'that's the rule, take it or leave'. But I think you do understand what's said here. We're not disputing the rules, since they are clear We're talking about sportsmanship here.

    Chess is a noble game, where claiming a win when one is obviously lost is frowned upon, rules or no rules.

    The world is full of men and mice... you decide in the end what you want to be
  10. 31 Jan '08 03:03
    Originally posted by Anton1959
    You're absolutely right, in saying 'that's the rule, take it or leave'. But I think you do understand what's said here. We're not disputing the rules, since they are clear We're talking about sportsmanship here.

    Chess is a noble game, where claiming a win when one is obviously lost is frowned upon, rules or no rules.

    The world is full of men and mice... you decide in the end what you want to be
    Surely the world is full of winners and losers...you decide in the end what you want to be

    Lets say that instead of just the glory of winning a tournament there is in fact £20,000 at stake. You are in the position to time your opponent out which will win you the tournament and prize money, however your opponent is one move away from checkmate.

    Would you take the timeout?
  11. 31 Jan '08 05:45 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by adramforall
    Surely the world is full of winners and losers...you decide in the end what you want to be

    Lets say that instead of just the glory of winning a tournament there is in fact £20,000 at stake. You are in the position to time your opponent out which will win you the tournament and prize money, however your opponent is one move away from checkmate.

    Would you take the timeout?
    To be honest, no, I wouldn't... Money is just that: money... Taking the win while being in that situation is dishonor... Or better still: claiming the win in that situation is showing what kind of loser you realy are...

    Sorry, but coming up with that example (the 20.000 pound) just says more about you than about the game

    ---

    'Old Chinese proverb says: Man with hand in pocket feel little cocky...'
  12. Standard member RDM
    31 Jan '08 07:15
    Yup - I agree with Anton.

    I would rather resign the game than take the time out. I always feel guilty about taking a time out and always leave an extra day for the player to move. Of course - with my skill level - I might be in a toally losing position and time the guy out because I don't realise the position I am in.

    Besides - there is nothing really at stake here - this is a friendly site. Might as well use an engine to win if it means that much to you. At the end of the day - its up to the person.

    OTB games are different than RHP games. The guy is there and if he times out - there is no excuse.
  13. Subscriber Ponderable
    chemist
    31 Jan '08 12:55
    Originally posted by adramforall

    Would you take the timeout?
    In fact I would rather that the clock would strike in competitive games (tournaments and clans).
    Taking a time-out leaves a bad taste .

    I have at the moment 19 skulls sitting, so I am not playing to take time-outs, but as a lot of people keep pointing out it is part of the game.
  14. 01 Feb '08 08:26
    If you are playing OTB and your opponents clock runs out, do you let him/her carry on playing?

    I will timeout if ts a tournament that I can potentially win and I will claim the skull in clan games because its not just a win for me its points for my clan.

    If its a friendly game then I dont timeout (within reason, if a player has been inactive for a long period then I probably would)
  15. 01 Feb '08 08:37
    Originally posted by Pigface1
    If you are playing OTB and your opponents clock runs out, do you let him/her carry on playing?

    I will timeout if ts a tournament that I can potentially win and I will claim the skull in clan games because its not just a win for me its points for my clan.

    If its a friendly game then I dont timeout (within reason, if a player has been inactive for a long period then I probably would)
    Losing the main issue here (again): it's not 'just' a matter of time-out... look at the game: the guy claiming the win on time-out is mate in one...

    Since he normally gives up in a lost situation way before this stage, I think this is not 'just' a time-out. But that would be near impossible to prove.

    I think it's a matter of opinion. He's dead, one move for his opponent to finish it... So, he claims the time-out and walks away with victory, holding his head up high? Of course everyone is entitled to his/her own opinion, but to me this guy is a disgrace to the game.

    But hey, this discussion will never end. It's nice though to see people showing their real character in this thread

    Nice weekend,
    Signing off...