GameKnot Forum
[ mod this thread ] << - < - > - >>
| From | Message |
amanda1975
1/07/2008
11:28:50
[ report abuse ] |
 Subject: Procrastinating
Message:
I suppose that I am somewhat guilty of this myself. But why is it that many players take so long to play a game when they are losing, but want to finish the game in less than a day when they are winning. The way that I handle this particular situation is to get a little revenge against the person that is purposely delaying the game is waiting until the last minute or two to make a move so that they think that they are going to win on a timeout and then finally making a move.
|
heinzkat
1/07/2008
11:32:02
[ report abuse ] | ...
Message:
This has been brought up many times, recently AGAIN in two topics. It just stays a hot topic on these 'correspondence chess' websites.
I suppose you can read enough there to affirm your opinion. :-)
 gameknot.com
gameknot.com
|
chuckventimiglia
1/07/2008
11:39:37
[ report abuse ] | It is human nature....
Message:
to do as you describe. People will always play faster and
with more enthusiasm when they are winning.
As for me I would rather get a totally lost game over with.
No matter what people are entitled to take all the time they
have allotted. As long as they stay in the time limits no one
has a gripe.
|
chessnovice
1/07/2008
13:23:17
[ report abuse ] | ...
Message:
I have a difficult time with intentionally waiting more than two days to move, even when I'm losing. Internally, I become antsy and feel the need to make a move just to see what the opponent will do. I can understand the need to look around the board and try to find the way out, any possible way out, of a bad position. But for some reason, it's just not my way...
|
firebrand
1/10/2008
20:31:24
[ report abuse ] |
Message:
I've had people go on vaction when they saw I was about to give mate. People are just exploiting the last chance at a cheap win by hoping something happens to you and you time-out.
|
yanm
1/11/2008
23:39:30
[ report abuse ] | My two cents
Message:
Firebrand, are you sure they went to vacations because you were going to give mate? Maybe they just went to vacations because they didn't feel to play chess for a while or because they were busy or because they were really travelling or because they had a medical urgency or because their dogs and cats were sick or because they had problem with their Internet connection. Additionally, GK players have usually more than one games running on, so I guess that they don't take vacations each time they are going to loose in one game...
GK is a correspondence chess site; we have to accept that it can take a long time before a game is complete or even a move is made. Period.
|
ccmcacollister
1/12/2008
02:27:20
[ report abuse ] | It is true ...
Message:
There are many reasons for PP'g. I think we should consider that the I-net in general is often the last place for folks who may be ill or shut-ins especially, to easily socialize and find some entertainment. Something which gameknot does very well. Remember, not everyone is healthy. Also, not everyone is:
Sitting on the edge of their seat about their Chess games,
nor wanting to play massive numbers of games,
nor going to interfere with their "real" lives for chess pursuits,
nor working only One Job,
nor at a job that makes no special demands on their time and has no travel,
nor emotionally tied to their games, etc.
* * *
GK in particular is a site with many players from MANY LANDS. Much cultural differences, especially about the importance and approach to Chess, therefore exist here, in addition to individual differences.
* * *
It is true there are also those who view each loss like unto a small personal death~! Or may seek to win at all costs, hopefully within the rules of play however
. They have a right to such an approach, what has been called "chess for blood" or "Maximizing", if they so wish.
At times, Yes, this approach can fall outside of "normally accepted" Chess Etiquette as well. None-the-less, I think it has to be considered another Valid approach, tho it may make no friends and possibly alienate other players to where they will not rematch in the future, or upon seeing for eg someone played to mate every game with large PP's and long-term game times. Such is their right as well, to try to avoid signing onto a 4 year game if they realize it would be likely to occur with someone.
* * *
About the worse thing a player can do (to himself) tho, is to let an opponent KNOW that they are impatient for a game to conclude. Their opponent may then be inclined to say unto him/herself "They just don't Get It, that this is a CORRESPONDENCE Chess site", and games can last as long as the time control and
meta-controls (like PP's) allow.
Some opponents will then exercise their own right to try to 'show' the impatient "what it is about" or teach them some patience. So a point here; if you ARE impatient and decide not to change that attitude from within, then best NOT let your opp KNOW it~! Some will exploit that just like any weakness you showed on the board. Nor would it necessarily be "wrong", imo, if they don't overdo it; tho it is not the friendliest nor politest stance. Still they might be justified to feel that You were impolite to try to rush them ... which is also against the GK rules BTW.
* * * * *
Although it is not something I DO (at least not often; and only in some exceptional case, since I no longer play Tournaments for Bloodsport)... there is no doubt in my mind, that if an opp is impatient enough I can win the game by using their own state of mind against them. Perhaps deliberately entering a slower line where I get to grind upon their position for many moves ... or continue pursuing the slightest advantage long beyond where I might have given a draw to a patient opponent.
[ Largely because I KNOW that "where Impatience Exists, oversights follow" in the game of Chess. Any DISCOMFORT an opp feels, be it positional or situational (eg. impatience, dislike of an opening, etc) increases winning chances against them. ]
I did exactly this last in an OTB game where an opp 200 points below me kept insisting with increasing vehemence that the Rook and Pawn ending was a draw. I knew that in truth I had a slight edge, and so chose to pursue it to the Win or to where he actually achieved a fully equal position. Largely because of his demonstrated impatience.
As he became more huffy and puffy with each move, apparently insulted that I would put a player of his stature thru the grind, in this "obviously drawn" ending ... he became more impatient as well as angry. Until finally, ... [Can you Guess?!] Upon the very move where my advantage could have been dissipated for a truly drawn position ...
he dropped material instead. A pawn? Oh NO, he DROPPED HIS ROOK~!!
Suddenly he didn't mind playing on some more tho . . . ?!? Strange but true. [Actually I can understand that. There is a "wind-down" period often needed to concede a tense struggle after a losing blunder, in a game where it is totally shocking to be instantly LOST. It sometimes takes me a couple extra moves in OTB. Sometimes not. ]
What I like to suggest is that we all play our own game at our own pace within the rules and Time Controls that We have signed up for, and PP's are a part of, and in the process, "cut each other some slack". In other words, tolerance. I believe it will be found that ceasing to assign opponents ulterior motives for their deeds of time use or PP, and giving the benefit of the doubt, will make everyone's outlook on that game the better for it. Relax! If its there, Your Win will come. One way or another, there is a limit to each game. Its not forever, nor life and death.
But if one Really wants to speed up a game anyway; there are always conditional moves to offer. Or if a forced mate exists, the variations might be texted to the opp., Advising outright the forced conditional sequence that awaits. He might then be inclined to resign, from knowing that You Know what it what in the game. [Of course, one best be sure of their analysis to do that.] Asking for a Resignation has always been considered bad form tho.
In OTB chess some have even considered announcing "Mate-in-#Moves" to be bad form, tho in postal that could hardly be the case since Conditional/IF moves were printed right out to the opp when offered, as it had to be. IMO, I see no reason why the Postal convention cannot be used here as well, in online corr play.
Regards All, Craig A.C. }8-)
|
ccmcacollister
1/12/2008
02:36:37
[ report abuse ] | PS ...
Message:
I have to agree with chuckventimiglia 100% as well. Perhaps we are fortunate to be former Postal players, and no doubt seen games of years. And here, you at least get a win if your opponent Does Time Out, after his Emergency PP is used up.
In postal you had to report TWO oversteps to get a Time Forfeit, and there were often questions that could arise and mitigate the decision. Examining Post Marks, Time Records, and individual postcards that were sent. It is much easier, and faster play now, with corr being online. And much more certain when a forfeit does occur.
If you ever feel really impatient about a game ... relax and remind yourself you could be playing a postal game in a totally passive position where you must watch your opponent grind and test you over the next TWO YEARS . . . hmmm?
Then you can feel LUCKY about your own game!
}8-)
PS// Or to feel Really REALLY lucky; think of that hypothetical Postal chess game as being International play ... then you can change that 2 year grind to being ... Oh, say 4 to SIX years of it ! You LUCKY player you ... that is NOT YOU!!! :)
|
firebrand
1/12/2008
05:25:06
[ report abuse ] |
Message:
Yanm,
I can agree there are those instances you speak of, however, I know when someone is intentionally dragging a totally lost position out, we all do. I'm not complaining because I know I will eventually get the win anyway, but I am pointing out that people who do this are looking for the last chance they can to get a cheap win. And yes, I've played postal chess for a few years well before the Internet hit it big. Even in that venue I had people drag a lost game out as long as they can.
|
munja100
1/12/2008
07:19:02
[ report abuse ] |
Message:
I'm irritated by extremely slow players signing up for tournaments that have "fast players only" comment. For example, Norman's fast play #10 started on 7th December, and one player hasn't completed any match, and one player completed two matches. Because of that, tournaments last few months (I really hope it won't last few years) and I can't sign up for any new tournaments.
Actually, I think that a tournament shouldn't be counted towards the total number that player can play at a time, if he hasn't any active games in it. The way it is now, I can have 8 inactive tournaments in months, and be unable to start any new...
|
heinzkat
1/12/2008
07:26:56
[ report abuse ] |
Message:
"I'm irritated by extremely slow players"
Welcome to correspondence chess. :-)
|
munja100
1/12/2008
07:39:52
[ report abuse ] |
Message:
No, no, I don't mind the fact that someone is playing slow, I mind his applying for fast tournament.
|
leo_london
1/12/2008
18:19:19
[ report abuse ] |
Message:
Long games...16 years,
Karl Brenzinger – Francis Eugene Brenzinger
Correspondence, 1859 – 18 March 1875
Two Knights’ Defence
1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bc4 Nf6 4 Ng5 d5 5 exd5 Na5 6 Qe2 Nxc4 7 Qxc4 Bd6 8 d3 O-O 9 Nc3 h6 10 Nge4 Kh8 11 O-O Nh5 12 d4 f5 13 Nxd6 cxd6 14 dxe5 dxe5 15 Qe2 Qe8 16 Nb5 f4 17 f3 Ng3 18 hxg3 fxg3 19 f4 Bd7 20 Nd6 Qe7 21 Ne4 Qh4 22 Nxg3 Qxg3 23 Rf3 Bg4 24 Rxg3 Bxe2 25 Re3 Bc4 26 d6 Rxf4 27 Re1 Rd4 28 b3 Bb5 29 c4 Bc6 30 c5 Rg4 31 Re2 Rf8 32 Be3 Kg8 33 a4 Rb4 34 Rb2 Kf7 35 Bd2 Rg4 36 Bc3 Ke6 37 b4 Rf3 38 Bxe5 Kxe5 39 b5 Be4 40 Rd2 Rfg3 41 Raa2 Bxg2 42 d7 Bc6+ 43 Kh2 Bxd7 44 Rxd7 Rg6 45 Re2+ Kf6 46 Rde7 (This mistake was attributed to impatience after Black took seven months over his 45th move.) 46...Rg2+ 47 Rxg2 Rxg2+ 48 Kxg2 Kxe7 49 Kf3 h5 50 a5 Kd7 51 White resigns.
And,
H. Jarvis, Croydon, played postal chess from 1931 (when he went on holiday to Germany) onwards, with Eberhardt Wilhelm, secretary of the international correspondence chess organization. When the war started, it was Mr Jarvis to move. Naturally the game was abruptly interrupted, and after the war ended it was two years before normal postal services were resumed. Wilhelm thereupon wrote and pointed out that it had been Mr Jarvis’ move for eight years and said that if he did not reply by return he would claim the game. Mr Jarvis had the move ready; he dispatched a move at once and the games were duly concluded. So the one move took eight years. “Is this a record” asks Mr Jarvis “for the longest time ever taken to play a chess move?”’
|
newjack
1/13/2008
07:20:55
[ report abuse ] | Postal
Message:
Do you just mail the moves to each other.
|
|
Post a reply to this message:
|
|  |
