Net-Chess.Comhttps://www.net-chess.com/phpBB2/

I love chess, and I love this site. I have been playing here since 2004. It is, by far, the best chess site on the internet. However, there is one circumstance that drives me crazy. As we all know there are players that move in a timely fashion until they find themselves in a losing position. That's when they stop moving, and time out. I find that to be very frustrating. I'm sure many of my fellow net-chess players feel the same way. Now I check a players profile before joining a match. If there is too high a percentage of forfeits in relationship to the number of games played I won't join the match. I wish everyone else would do that too. Perhaps if these sore losers found themselves being ignored they would change their ways. I urge everyone to do this. That's the only way I can think of to let these people know they are being very poor sports. Can anyone else think of another way to deal with these people? If you can please post your idea.

Frankly, I've considered the guillotine!


Honestly though, I don't know if there's any other realistic way besides the one you suggest, Lou.

Much like yourself, I detest playing games against that type of player. I can never figure out why they do it? Do they not respect their opponents enough to finish a game? Are their egos so fragile they can't bear to accept a possible defeat? .
I can understand that there may be occasions where everyone has not the time to complete a game, and hence times out. It's happened to me three times! But out of 1100 games, I don't think that's too bad.
And if those poor souls are afraid to play on in a losing position, they lose out on the thrill of grasping victory from the jaws of defeat, when their opponent makes a fatal miscue!

I use the method you spoke of to avoid them. I check the profiles, and if they time out an unreasonable number of games, I don't join it!
I hope that now this method of yours is mentioned. enough players here will do the same!

- Cliff.

.........................................

I suppose I've been fortunate thus far, since I don't believe I have played against any of these 'sore loser' type opponents.

Prior to joining a tourney however, I will ofter peruse opponents' profiles in order to calculate their win percentage, but perhaps now I should also take a peep at their forfeit percentage.

Thanks Langelli / Cliff for the suggestion .... I think I'll comply.

Glad you joined our "Boycott" of time out players, Abiodun!

And when I said

cliff wrote:
And if those poor souls are afraid to play on in a losing position, they lose out on the thrill of grasping victory from the jaws of defeat, when their opponent makes a fatal miscue!

it made me think of something. I think I can give you a game you may remember, here's one from April, 2010. It was in the original "Zapper Classic"!

g1105023594

Remember?

cliff wrote:... it made me think of something. I think I can give you a game you may remember, here's one from April, 2010. It was in the original "Zapper Classic"!
g1105023594 Remember ?

...................................

I'm highly impressed with your memory Cliff ! I had totally forgotten about this ancient duel we enjoyed back in 2010 !
YOU were suppose to win that one !

And yes, for those who "throw-in-the-towel" too soon .....

cliff wrote:they lose out on the thrill of grasping victory from the jaws of defeat, when their opponent makes a fatal miscue !

Well Stated !

It's happening again. I lost 2 games to a particular player a couple of weeks ago. I later joined a match that this player was in. I won 1 game, and have a strong position in the second game. Now he isn't moving. He's moving in other games, but not in mine. I'll never understand this. in any event, I won't join any match in the future if I see he is in. Unbelievable! I'm tempted to say who he is, but I refuse to come down to his level. Anyway, back to my games.

Let me give an example of such a player: mgilbert. Look at his rating history: playing well against strong players, time out ( thousands!!) against weaker players.....Brrrrrrr

Perfect example! Another player to avoid.

And here's one more for the fast growing list - which I think is great! -we seem to be making!


ludger - 5178 Games Played and 3156 Time Outs! Something over 60%!!!

The solution is very simple:

1) Always check out the profile. I discovered that many people don't, and some don't even know how.
2) Never sign up for a match with a new player, whether 1-on-1 or including others whom you know.
3) Never play 30+2 matches unless you REALLY need the time.
4) Best: never join any matches at all; create your own and UNJOIN if you don't like who signs up.
5) I made the mistake of signing up with a new player, some time ago; one 'eriva'.
It because he was already playing and seemed to know what he was doing, although that turned out to be an illusion...
Within a very short period of time he was playing over 70 games, I believe.
He played 1 game through, abandoned our second one, lost all his games except for 1 draw (if I remember correctly), and then...vanished.

gcohen wrote:The solution is very simple:

1) Always check out the profile. I discovered that many people don't, and some don't even know how.
2) Never sign up for a match with a new player, whether 1-on-1 or including others whom you know.
3) Never play 30+2 matches unless you REALLY need the time.
4) Best: never join any matches at all; create your own and UNJOIN if you don't like who signs up.
5) I made the mistake of signing up with a new player, some time ago; one 'eriva'.
It because he was already playing and seemed to know what he was doing, although that turned out to be an illusion...
Within a very short period of time he was playing over 70 games, I believe.
He played 1 game through, abandoned our second one, lost all his games except for 1 draw (if I remember correctly), and then...vanished.

If everyone adopts #2 then new players will never get any games going

We can ignore people on the forums but not on the playing site afaik. Be nice if we could stop certain folks from joining matches/tourneys

If everyone adopts #2 then new players will never get any games going

I detect a lack of logic in your statement, mr. ketchup. It is not my responsibility to engage with new players.
There will always be enough people who will do it.
It ought to be clear that my statements were directed to those of us who are tired of the irresponsible
behavior of many new, and certain other well-known players.
A new player can always sign on for 'system' matches.

Yes, it would be nice, I completely agree with you, if we had more control over our matches.
If I post a 4-person match, I can never know who the last to join is. There ought to be an opt-out option.
The chess.com system is good---if you post a seek, you can abort without it being a loss, if you don't want to play whoever signed up.

Wow! We seem to be making headway. I, for one, have always avoided new players because they don't have enough of a track record for me to know if they are honorable or not. There are plenty of people that will play new players, and then there's the system matches. New players don't say new for vey long.

I never mentioned players names before, but what he heck. How about adding "ludger" to the list. About 60% forfeits.

langelli wrote:I never mentioned players names before, but what he heck. How about adding "ludger" to the list. About 60% forfeits.

You must have missed it, Lou, but I already mentioned ludger above.



At any rate, I think I found the new percentage champion!

braveheart - 22 Games Played and 22 Time Outs! A nice round percentage of 100%!!!


(He joined in since June, and I see he's joined yet another match!)

Braveheart? How about Chickenheart! Why does he even bother playing?

Devil’s advocate here. I often play an into inferior position but have significantly more time then my opponent. In such positions I will quite deliberately “stall”. I don’t consider this to be poor sportsmanship when I do, or when I’m on the other side of the equation and my opponent does it to me. Using the clock as tactic is quite legitimate. Sometimes I may employ it from a winning position as well. Let’s say for example, I have a theoretically won game and I have 140 days to my opponents 20 days. I also have 40 other games on my plate. Why devote time and energies to such a game? Let him suffer! Now we all know that playing chess requires a certain continuity of thought, keeping track of threads lines and maintaining a level of determination, both of which tent to diminish over time. The clock is a tool you can use to “psych” your opponent, frustrate him. And judging from some of the responses here, it seems to be working on you guys. I am completely unbothered when an opponent times out. He can lose by resigning, he can lose by checkmate or he can lose by timing out. I care not which.

Just playing Devils Advocate here.
A roll i often relish
Dan

knightmare:

you've said this before and it's a total crock.
your attitude is sophomoric, and the only person your are "psyching"
is yourself, into having delusions of grandeur.

Wow . I didn"t expect such vitriol. I have not posted here in several years and certainly never expresed an opinion on this subject. Perhaps your confusing me someone else. In any case if this is any indication of what i might expect, it will several more years before i come back. Goodbye

In looking bach i see i have in fact addressed this issue before and apologies for my forgetfulness but stand by my reasoning.

Dan[/quote]

knightmare wrote:"Devil’s advocate here. I often play an into inferior position but have significantly more time then my opponent. In such positions I will quite deliberately “stall”. I don’t consider this to be poor sportsmanship when I do, or when I’m on the other side of the equation and my opponent does it to me. Using the clock as tactic is quite legitimate." ...

Okay. I can agree with this logic, Dan. In OTB chess tournaments, that's what the clock and time controls are all about! I admit that, on Net-Chess, I've looked at a game and thought "I could be in a lot of trouble in this position, but (my opponent) has only 10 days left to my 100, so I'll keep complicate the position and make him eat up time!" I think we've all done that!

knightmare wrote:... Sometimes I may employ it from a winning position as well. Let’s say for example, I have a theoretically won game and I have 140 days to my opponents 20 days. I also have 40 other games on my plate. Why devote time and energies to such a game? ...

Why? Quite simple, Dan. The first thing that comes to mind is respect for the opponent! Too many games? Reduce the number of games you play at one time.

knightmare wrote:... Now we all know that playing chess requires a certain continuity of thought, keeping track of threads lines and maintaining a level of determination, both of which tent to diminish over time. The clock is a tool you can use to “psych” your opponent, frustrate him. And judging from some of the responses here, it seems to be working on you guys. ...

I think you'll agree that the last line of your above was completely uncalled for, Dan! Why do people want to make a thread insulting or confrontational? You were right in the first line though, regarding the 'continuity of thought' each game needs. All the better reason to keep fewer games on the go at once!

knightmare wrote:... I am completely unbothered when an opponent times out. He can lose by resigning, he can lose by checkmate or he can lose by timing out. I care not which.

I agree, to a point. Doesn't a 'time-out' victory seem a bit hollow, though?

At any rate, I hope you'll at least consider our viewpoint on the ones that time out repeatedly, for whatever reasons!

- Cliff.

I, for one, consider a win by timing out to be a hollow win. It takes all the fun out of the game. Using the clock in an across the board game is totally different in my mind than using the clock on this site. Across the board games in a tournament is a totally different game than what we play here. Games on this site are for fun. Hence, timing out on this site is unsportsmanlike conduct to me. Throw the flag, ref!

Cliff,
Post me a challenge. I would like to play you, but I don't know your user name. Mine is langelli. Post 2 games, OK? I promise not to forfeit.
Lou

Sure, Lou. I'd love a match, chum.

Give me a few days to get some games I have going finished, and I'll post one, okay?

sounds good, Cliff

Sorry for the delay, Lou. A lot of things happening around here over the last two weeks caused my absence. I'm back now, though, and I'll post it tomorrow, okay?

That's fine, Cliff. Post it when you're ready.

Better late than never, Lou!

A small tourney has been posted, inviting yourself, johnb, and smoothoperator!

Both also great guys!

Hope you can make it!

Been thinking of some ways to penalize this differently. Currently thinking of either flagging a game as abandoned, and the user has to make a move in that game if it's thier move before they can move in any other games. And/or flagging a user as abandoning a game, so they have to always move in the game with the oldest previous move, the restriction would be lifted after a period of time (7 days, 30 days, 6 months after repeated offenses).

I like the idea, Greg!

I've been here since 2008, and this has got to be one of the most frequently posted complaints, as this thread (and many others!) demonstrates.

It's certainly not even your fault in any remote way, so anything you can do to control or curtail it is a bonus for all of us who have found it annoying!

Thanks again for working on the idea, and I know that, if implemented, you'll be backed by all of us who love the site and the game!

- Cliff.

Langeli, I will be glad to play you and unlike the players you are referring to I resign in lost positions and start a new game. It is only good sportsmanship to do so.

I couldn't agree more. There are plenty of good sports here on net=chess. We tend to take them for granted. I posted a 2 game challenge to you. I hope you accept the challenge. My first name is Lou.