| From | Message |
wanstronian
5/15/2008
09:07:46
[ report abuse ] |
 Subject: Bad sport
Message:
I know this topic has been covered multiple times, but I find it so frustrating when someone won't resign a clearly lost game OR make timely moves. In one of my games there is obviously no chance for my opponent - but he has sat there for over a week letting the time tick down on our game, while making moves in his others. I've tried asking him nicely to get a move on, he didn't even have the courtesy to respond.
By delaying, he's also preventing me and other people in the mini-T from starting other games.
I find it extremely unsporting, and will take great delight in check-mating him - at whatever pace he feels appropriate.
|
chessnovice
5/15/2008
09:20:37
[ report abuse ] | ...
Message:
I had an opponent tell me to hurry up here years ago, even though I felt I was moving in adequate enough time. It turned ugly, and I'm thankful that an opponent has never made such a request from me since them. He may be the kind of person who likes to play games out as far as possible (I sometimes do the same, just to see how well my king can escape danger). And given past experiences, I would probably avoid responding if someone told me to hurry up, as well.
I'm a bit detached from your situation, because I'm not involved in any of the experienced delays. But the way I see it, putting yourself at risk of being rude over something so unimportant doesn't seem worth it. And, dare I say, it can come across as unsporting in its own way. Patience is a virtue.
|
heinzkat
5/15/2008
09:21:07
[ report abuse ] | He has made all his moves within the
Message:
Pre-agreed time limit (including the ability the postpone at any time).
So there is, well, nothing to complain about :-)
|
wanstronian
5/15/2008
10:19:07
[ report abuse ] |
Message:
chessnovice - agreed - if he was slow in making moves where he had to be careful, I'd understand. If he was trying to avoid defeat, even in a lost game, that'd be okay. But he's not making any moves at all. I sent him a message saying that I meant no offence, but would he consider SOME sort of board activity. He didn't respond. My next message is not quite so polite, but still, I feel, reasonable.
heinzkat - of course he's playing within the rules. That doesn't mean he can't be unsporting about it!
Anyway, 'nuff said I guess.
|
kansaspatzer
5/15/2008
11:41:15
[ report abuse ] |
Message:
I have a question. Do you think it's rude to tell an opponent "gg" or "the game is over" before the game is over? I recently had an opponent tell me that three times within a two games series, and I informed her she was being rude. She responded that I was the one who was rude because I was not resigning in a lost position.
|
kansaspatzer
5/15/2008
11:45:22
[ report abuse ] |
Message:
And it wasn't a clearly lost position, it was immediately after I sacrificed a piece for a dangerous attack.
|
ionadowman
5/15/2008
13:48:02
[ report abuse ] | kansaspatzer...
Message:
... has this game ended, or is it ongoing? I'm intrigued.
The "gg" gag is a bit cheeky. But I can imagine someone sending a "gg" message who was enjoying the cut and thrust of an exciting game and wished to express the fact. That seems OK to me, though I can see that it might be misunderstood.
It is possible within the rules to be rude about handling a dead lost position, but in general, it is the player who is the sole judge of whether or not to resign. Where the rudeness comes in might be cases of lengthy postponements in a position so lost there is no fight left in it. Imagine White (to move) postponing in this position:
w
Now, that is rude.
Cheers,
Ion
|
heinzkat
5/15/2008
13:59:27
[ report abuse ] | No, that's not rude, is it?
Message:
Is there anything attached to postponing on this website besides showing you cannot make all your moves within the 'normal' time limits? (in effect it's just taking extra time, which is perfectly fine and allowed, even (a big) part of the normal time limits here)
There is nothing 'rude' in postponing, so you can't judge the (imaginary) White player to be 'rude' here.
(not so well substantiated as I imagined before writing this message, but you get the point, hopefully)
|
skipwallace555
5/15/2008
15:21:54
[ report abuse ] | gg
Message:
When I play a stronger player and he gives me a "gg" I take it as a compliment that I am givng him [her] a good contest. You are right however, this subject has been beat to death and not worth a lot of discussion. Just move on as suggested. There are far more nice people here to play and it is not logical to dwell on the bad apples.
|
kansaspatzer
5/15/2008
16:35:39
[ report abuse ] | in reponse
Message:
The game is over. After move 14, my opponent sent me a message that said "you just lost the game."  gameknot.com She sent me another one later in the game. In the second game of the series, I sacrificed another piece for an attack, she told me "gg", and I told her that her behavior was rude. She responded by saying "you are the one who is rude by insulting my intelligence by playing on, don't you think?" I then put her on my ignore list.
|
chessnovice
5/15/2008
21:01:02
[ report abuse ] | kansaspatzer
Message:
Maybe the guy thought he was being courteous by saying that comment two moves too late. Sacrifice wasn't very sound. :p
In seriousness, though, pre-emptively saying "gg" on a correspondence game is pretty tacky.
Blitz is a different story, though. For some reason, I don't get insulted much by an opponent saying "gg" early. I guess the difference is that here, you still have contact with the opponent after the game/while you resign. On blitz, that's not always the case.
I remember in college, I would play games online in between classes. I played a blitz game where an opponent told me to hurry (imagine that, since I was already late for class!), while I was in a lost position. I managed to turn things around in a mutually sub-par endgame, and in my immaturity at the time I reciprocated by insisting the person hurry. I think he got the point, but now I'm just more inclined to resist educating people on what is rude or not. Habits like that never change, and they're only a big deal when you allow them to get to you.
wanstronian, if you are concerned that the individual is delaying games chronically ust to agonize minitournament players, then I think there is always the option of reporting him. But I would only use that as a very last resort.
|
kansaspatzer
5/16/2008
01:26:25
[ report abuse ] |
Message:
Even if the individual in wanstronian's game was doing that, they're not breaking any rules, so I don't know if anything could be done about it other than putting whoever it is on our ignore lists.
|
lighttotheright
5/16/2008
01:54:43
[ report abuse ] |
Message:
Sometimes people don't resign in a clearly lost position because they think you are so much better than they are that by delaying the loss they won't lose as many rating points. It's frustrating, but clearly within the rules.
|
chessnovice
5/16/2008
04:24:54
[ report abuse ] | kansaspatser
Message:
That's true. That's why I had to add the caveat, "chronically just to antagonize minitournament players". There have been players thrown out for doing that sort of thing on a regular basis.
Misspelling "just" and using the word "agonize" instead of "antagonize" was simply my artistic direction. ;p
|
nathanman22
5/16/2008
07:28:21
[ report abuse ] | Frustration from the other side
Message:
Okay, I have been a victim of impatient players for many years. I hate the fact that people ASSUME that the reason someone is stalling is due to the fact that they are purposefully being vindictive. This is not to say it isn't the case sometimes, but I have been at school trying to earn my degree and the past semester I have postponed my way through almost the entire time out of necessity. I had two people get very mad at me and leave nasty messages even though I left them a clear message about why I was postponing as well as leaving up to date notes on my profile about the state of my games. I think that the people who are trying to push you to play faster than the time limits allotted are the ones being rude. If you don't like it, then don't play me. I do feel bad for those in GK tournaments who were held up because of me, but many people were still playing so I wasn't the only one holding them up. Stop rushing me and stop assuming that I'm stalling because I've lost. Also, consider this--people who are taking a longer time are probably taking more time to analyze a losing position to seek a possible winning solution. I have won games when I am 15 points down before--so I will not resign until I am SURE it's over and that's my perrogative. By the way, Kansas, I would have continued to play that game out just to spite your opponent. People have no right to rush you if you play within the specified time limits and use the postponement feature with explanations. Enough said--I will get down off my soap box, but someone needs to speak up for the other side from time to time.
-Nathanman22
|
ionadowman
5/16/2008
14:38:32
[ report abuse ] | It's a matter of degree...
Message:
I still think that in the example I gave above, when faced with mate next move, a player would have to be very rude, or unbelievably obtuse, to postpone at that point. The situation is of course hypothetical and exaggerated: who would be so mean as to postpone at such a time? But the purpose of this example is to show that there is a line somewhere.
However, it behoves us to incline towards tolerance of such behaviour, as the "losing" player might have any number of reasons for playing on. In the game to which kansaspatzer refers, his opponent acted immaturely, but that is no surprise when you find she's 15 years old. I think kansaspatzer was indeed objectively losing after move 14, having sacrificed unsoundly, but he had every right and every reason to play on, to see if anything could be extracted from his attacking position whilst Black ravaged his Q-side. From what I can gather he still thought he had chances, and that's fair enough, too.
White's resignation came at the "right" time: when it was clear that all his chances had been exhausted, and he was about to lose his queen.
Cheers,
Ion
|
ccmcacollister
5/16/2008
21:34:20
[ report abuse ] | ION ...
Message:
maybe someone would PP there because they feel like I do, that it is Rude to Resign when faced with Mate-in-one! :) haha. [The point here being, you just can't Win when it comes to Chess ettiquette, involving multiple countries especially. But a well played ettiquette-draw is not such a bad thing i think]
***
I mean really, they have insulted my intelligence already by implying I will err with King and Queen in a mate ... then resign the move before mate, as if just to say; "Also I withhold any pleasure of the Mate" :)) That is what tells me they were not just looking to see my sterling 9 move or less Q mate, you see ...
* * *
Of course my usual response in such a situation is to laugh because I know that I didn't care if I won the game or not. (Don't tell anyone this ... but I have lost Chess games before! No, really its true. Yet lived thru it... more or less; but lets not get too existential :))
***
If I somehow woke up and found myself in that position, i think I would just move my King and let them mate me, perhaps send it as a conditional move. Then I would quit Chess forever, again ....
|
bluelake99
5/17/2008
14:02:12
[ report abuse ] | The GK 1 day give away
Message:
I hate the way GameKnot gives time to games every weekend for no reason. I don't want to here about "most people" play from work thats bull, they should not be doing that anyway.
If the rules are 3 days per move, then 3 days it is. Its just another way for some to extend the game mostly used by people playing 80+ games.
|
chessnovice
5/17/2008
14:28:28
[ report abuse ] | meh
Message:
Everyone is given the time, so it's not really giving preference towards any particular player.
You might not want to hear about most people, but I do think that most people do benefit from the consideration.
|
bluelake99
5/17/2008
18:18:44
[ report abuse ] | re: meh
Message:
It is giving preference to the players that agree to 3, 5, 7 day games then use that extra day in their schedule. I've had people that get that day but are still playing other games during the weekend... so its not that they can not play they are just overloaded or wish to delay it hoping for a rating change or some other reason (which they could use postpone for).
|
fmgaijin
5/18/2008
00:34:29
[ report abuse ] | OTB Equivalent
Message:
Once, when playing another master in a collegiate team tournament, I reached a position where, after queening a P, I suddenly had an unstoppable mate-in-1. My opponent then proceeded to "think" for the remaining 1 hour and 15 minutes on his clock before losing on time . . .
Perhaps he was hoping I'd fall asleep, which DID happen to me once in an early-morning round after I'd slept poorly (woke up in time to win the game in a time scramble, though early in the time scramble he was ahead on time and winning on the board). But what can you do but laugh and shake your head sadly? The rules are perfectly clear, just as those here at GK, and as long as the player abides by them, he/she still qualifies as a "minimally decent Samaritan." Systems of law usually don't require you to be a good Samaritan, though occasionally a chessplayer does do a good deed (like Korchnoi punching Kasparov's clock for him during time pressure in their Candidates' Match).
|
newjack
5/18/2008
12:03:54
[ report abuse ] | ???????
Message:
why not just go in thinking Iam going to have to put this person in CHECKMATE.
|
chessnovice
5/19/2008
05:47:38
[ report abuse ] | bluelake99
Message:
It's not really giving preference to those players, since the time is made available to you as well. It's just an integrated part of the clock that you have to factor in when starting a game. Better to have too much time than too little.
|
epimedes
6/07/2008
01:04:45
[ report abuse ] | etiquette...
Message:
On a slightly different note (though in the same vein), as a novice I am privileged to sometimes play much more highly rated opponents. On a couple of occasions I have been lucky enough to be in a position where I honestly thought the game was heading for a draw. Thing is, I didn't dare propose a draw for fearing that my opponent might be offended! Also, I might have been missing a devastating plan on their part. LOL as it turned out, on these occasions my opponents asked ME for a draw shortly after I'd considered asking them! It's very difficult sometimes to be brave enough to ask without causing offence!
|
ionadowman
6/07/2008
15:41:04
[ report abuse ] | epimedes...
Message:
... I can understand the way you feel about that, but I can't help feeling that it would be a pretty mean-spirited sort of dude who took offence (who CHOSE to take offence) at an honest offer of a draw.
To my mind, though, there is a kind of etiquette to draw offers - at least, it's a practice I stick to for the most part. Put simply: it is the player with the initiative who makes the offer.
Suppose I'm a pawn down in a simple K+R vs K+R+P ending. I'm fighting for the draw, the enemy for the win. So a draw offer from me isn't really an offer at all: it "offers" something my opponent already has, in effect. This would be true even if I knew the position to be a "book" draw and how to reach the half-point. My opponent might not know this - or at least won't know I know it - until I demonstate to his satisfaction that he has no win.
If I had the extra pawn, then it's up to me to offer the draw, but there is no reason not to test my opponent's knowledge before doing so.
If have seen this taken to ridiculous lengths, however. A fairly well-known NZ player found himself in a K+R vs K+R endgame, and played it out to 50 moves, refusing all offers of a draw.
[The ending is trivially easy to draw: Consider this position:
w
White plays 1.Re8+ and, whichever side Black retreats to, the WK goes the other way e.g. 1...Kd3 2.Kf2 after which it is absolutely impossible for Black to force a win. White just moves his K around the K-side, and will touch his rook only to exchange it, and not otherwise. The BK can never cross the file occupied by the WR. So an offer of a draw in such a situation is never misplaced were you even to obtain this position against Kasparov himself.]
There is a famous incident in the rather acrimonious drawn match between Tchigorin and Tarrasch, more than 100 years ago. In one game, the situation came down to a bishop and pawn ending, with half a dozen pawns left on the board. I don't recall the actual position, but it might have been something like this:
w
Tchigorin (Black) had been offering draws that had been repeatedly decined with increasing asperity by his opponent. Finally Tchigorin removed his bishop and said "Go ahead. Win."
In the light of the new situation Tarrasch came aware how silly he was being.
E.g. remove Blacks bishop
1.Bxc5 bxc5 2.b6 Kd6 ... White has no way of levering open the position to force home his extra pawn.
So, unless the offer is vexatious (I've been guilty of that myself once or twice), there is no occasion for anyone to take offence, whoever he is. But there is equally no occasion to take offence at someone deslining the draw, again provided the refusal is also honestly intended.
On one of the occasions I had a K+B+N vs K ending, my opponent kept insisting it was a draw. Now, he wasn't really "offering" as such, and, of course, I would have had no reason to accept the offer, whether or not I knew how to win it. I could not possibly lose! This dude's bellyaching distracted me long enough to waste several moves driving the enemy K towards the wrong corner, but when I did wake up, wrapped the thing up in maybe a dozen moves.
Was he convinced? It doesn't matter. He failed to "prove" his point, and I took home the win. It is possible that Judit Polgar's loss in a K+R vs K+N ending was of the opposite sort: "objectively" drawn at the outset with accurate play, but which had to be "proved" by the weaker side. It would be interesting to discover whether Ms Polgar ever did offer a draw in that game...
|
rallyvincent
6/08/2008
00:51:27
[ report abuse ] | Ion
Message:
Please excuse me, but in your first example, wouldn't White play
1. Rh3+ (any King's move)
2. Rh4+
winning the black Rook? I guess you accidently pleced the black rook on the fourth rank instead of the fifth.
|
buddie
6/08/2008
02:05:54
[ report abuse ] | Ion
Message:
Actually , regarding draw offers, I find that if I've just, say, dropped a pawn without compensation against someone rated 200 points lower than me, that is the best time to offer a draw - they often accept !
Doesn't work (and I don't try it) against higher rated players confident of being able to grind me down.
|
ionadowman
6/08/2008
17:32:58
[ report abuse ] | rallyvincent -
Message:
... You are, of course, correct. And that was after I corrected another diagram with the same inport that also had a hole in it. For some reason I can't read a screen chessboard worth a hang. Bummer.
But of course that goes to show that there are trivial or elementary situations in which one side can win at once. Place the Black rook on a5 (where I should have put it) and White has no win either.
buddie - I rather think that if someone rated 200 ELO higher than I am were to drop a pawn then offer a draw, I might be inclined to accept, myself! I'd certainly think seriously about it before declining...
On the other hand, if I drop a pawn against someone rated 200 higher, I try and make my opponent's life as difficult for him as I can (I had such an opponent time out a pawn ahead in a Q+P endgame, once. Then I crashed and burned in the return game - most ignominious).
Cheers,
Ion
|
lynvingen
6/09/2008
15:04:44
[ report abuse ] | I agree with heinzkat,
Message:
who wrote:
"Is there anything attached to postponing on this website besides showing you cannot make all your moves within the 'normal' time limits? (in effect it's just taking extra time, which is perfectly fine and allowed, even (a big) part of the normal time limits here)
There is nothing 'rude' in postponing, so you can't judge the (imaginary) White player to be 'rude' here."
In general I think it is wise not getting too attached to the game. Chess is a great game, but still a game.
|
bogg
6/10/2008
04:03:21
[ report abuse ] | lynvingen
Message:
Die heretic, die. To the pillory with thee.
CTCampbell
|
mikekelly666
6/20/2008
09:14:39
[ report abuse ] | I'm impressed
Message:
I have to say I'm really impressed with some of the players on GK.
They live on the other side of the world, do not see their opponent, rarely have discussions with their opponent yet they can deduce what the opponents intentions are in a game and deduce the fate of the game before it is finished.
Hey wanstronian, on behalf of the rest of us chess players who play games until checkmate learn patience and be a good sport yourself.
Patience in that any opponent can take all the time they want as long as it is within the time limits established in the game and GK's vacation rules. They don't have to justify to you or anyone else why they moved in other games and not yours. They don't have to justify to you or anyone else why in one part of the game they where moving fast and now are being slow. Your opponent is under no obligation to make things easier for you by hurrying up even in a lost position
Do you really think that messaging your opponent to make a move is being a good sport. In fact you admitted to violating Rule #1 of the GK's community standards. In case you didn't read them here is the quote from them
"The following are the basic rules of conduct that govern player interaction and activity within GameKnot Online Chess site and forums. Failure to act responsibly and comply with these rules may result in the suspension and/or termination of your account without any refund of any kind.
Rules of Conduct:
1. You may not harass, badger, threaten or rush other players. "
I think telling your opponent to get a move on whether is nicely or rudely is rushing other players. Your opponent not responding to you is probably the nicest thing they could do for you. Because if you told me that, I would report you to the GK staff without hesitation. Then take pleasure in your account being suspended or cancelled.
I'm glad that you will take pleasure in checkmating him. It is frustating when tournaments and games are precieved to be slow down. But that is the price we have to pay to play in a correspendence chess site. If you want fast games and tournaments then go to a OTB game or tournament.
|
|
Post a reply to this message:
|
