[My idea is that the potential winner would press a button that would automatically send a message to a group of trustees (or one of) who would act as (an) adjudicator(s).Strooooooongly disagree with this idea (no offense). In many games over the past 40+ years I've manage to produce a stalemate in lost positions and I've also been careless and allowed a stalemate when in a winning position. There are so many variables that it is difficult to make hard and fast rules on when to resign , as many variables as there are players. Chess is a game of strategy, sound play in openings, middle and end games, but it's also a game where the human factor tosses in blunders, pitfalls and swindles that can be set and turn games around. The idea of turning the end game results over to a committee or adjudicator is not a good one in my book and if ever instituted on this site I'd leave in protest! Players who play on in obvious lost positions are frustrating but lets be patient, the game will end. Note their names and avoid them in the future or play short term games so they can't drag moves out every 14-21 days!
Originally posted by NecrophileYou would think so, as this is a correspondence site, but there are people here with active games numbering in the 100s who just don't spend much time at all at any given position. There are also people who have less games, but still don't have the time to examine each game thoroughlty. Whatever the case, endgame blunders pop up all the time on this site. Have a look through some of the threads in this forum, there are some dandies.
Were the draws due to the player rushing in time trouble? As there is no timing, you lots of time to think your moves through and avoid stalemate (making the event of a player to throwing the game less likely).
Maybe this is just because I am a raw rookie at chess, but in a game where I had a winning situation, I think I would get satisfaction from seeing the game on to checkmate, or at least to some position where it is obvious that mate would happen in a move or two. The other person resigning early would almost make me feel cheated.
There is another recently active thread where a player linked to a game where he had the win locked up, but the other player kept going and got a stalemate out of it.
When in a losing position, sometimes I resign and sometimes I don't.
I like to make a few moves just to see how good my opponent is at killing me off. If they look a little shaky then I will continue for a few more. If they know what they are doing then I will resign.
I also sometimes like to keep playing to try and learn more about the endgame.
The one thing that I never do is slow down my move frequency. That would be unacceptable IMO.
If I am in a winning position then I am happy to let my opponent do as they choose.
Personally I do not care if I win or lose by checkmate or resigning. I only play because I enjoy the game and as a paying subscriber then I am entitled to play how I like, as is everyone else.
Regards to you all
Dave
🙂
I am sure that Game 571579 will turn out to be a learning experience for white. Painful? You bet! From move 49 on, he had black down to just a king. But black hung in there and got a stalemate out of it.
Originally posted by ExyIf that's your attitude then I'm happy to have annoyed you! 🙂
I agree with you there, Dave. Sometimes you just want to play out the endgame just to see what happens. I get more annoyed when people resign the minute they go a piece or two down half way into the match.
Originally posted by ShallowBlueI did wonder why you'd resigned our two recent games but in that case it didn't annoy me, it just confused me.
If that's your attitude then I'm happy to have annoyed you! 🙂
I end up staring at the board for an hour thinking why? What am I missing here? 😕
Still, I'm happy to get the wins, especially if they gain points for my clan too. 😀
Originally posted by NecrophileHere's an idea on this issue. How about when player has only pawns left and the opponent has a major piece or minor pieces with which it is possible to force mate, then the timebank is automatically erased and the move frequency setting decreased, thus ensuring the game can be played out if a player wants to but will not drag out! This could be implemented automatically without need for independant judgements. Have I thought this out properly or are there holes in my thinking?
How often does the problem occur? My idea is that the potential winner would press a button that would automatically send a message to a group of trustees (or one of) who would act as (an) adjudicator(s). It probably is too much work as no doubt there will be many who abuse their position and the situation would have to be reviewed etc, and further woul ...[text shortened]... le less likely to support the site as they wouldn't have to worry so much about "dead" games.
Originally posted by ExyI was having one of those days exy! 🙂
I did wonder why you'd resigned our two recent games but in that case it didn't annoy me, it just confused me.
I end up staring at the board for an hour thinking why? What am I missing here? 😕
Still, I'm happy to get the wins, especially if they gain points for my clan too. 😀
I just felt that I was playing badly and I wasn't going to get any mileage out of the positions I was in with a player of your ability.
I had read on another thread that you were very keen to bag clan points. So much so that even if it meant resigning positions yourself to clear the challenge and get the clan's win you would do so. Therefore I thought you would appreciate my actions. 🙂
In a just for fun game I would have continued playing and allowed you the pleasure of a coup de grace!
No offense was meant and I look forward to future challenges which may bring us together. Hopefully I will have improved enough to get some revenge by then. 🙂
Best Regards,
SB.
Decanter is right. It's their nickle. Let your opponent play it out. He might be thinking you'll stalemate or drop dead or something. The problem sometimes happens when a player of a very high rating is playing a very low rated player. The high rated player could carelessly drop a piece and still feel confident in winning. The low rated player might not even realize how hopeless his position is in. So, my advice is let it play on. What's the rush?
Such things happen in over the board play. There you have the pschological pressure from your opponent. In correspondance games you should resign when you have got no chances for yourself and you could win only if your oppenent commits a terrible blunder.
You must also take into account your opponents ability. As for playing out and learning, well over the board play is a better place for that. In a correspondance game you must respect your opponent's time(as well as yours)
I think I am a fairly inexperienced player. I still drop pieces, even when I have time to think about it.
I like to play games through to mate because:
1) I need the endgame experience. It is still valuable to me to learn to defend -- even in a losing position.
2) I need experience seeing how my opponents will force mate.
3) I don't know how likely it is that I might be able to force a draw, or that my opponent is on the alert to prevent one.
4) I think only pros never/rarely make mistakes. (btw, I have recently started analyzing my games, and find so far that every opponent under 1500 has made at least one big mistake in our game.)
I will resign only when it is clear to me that: I will lose AND my opponent will win.
As I am not that experienced yet, perhaps I will play on longer than some would like. Please have patience with players like me, I am not trying to be difficult, only trying to learn as much as I can.
Sometimes if it is clearly a losing position for me, I will message my opponent asking if they mind if I play on. To date, no one has replied other than "OK, please play on". I greatly appreciate such consideration.