09 Sep 08
Originally posted by mcstankbootysnortjp is a damn fool for doing so. I would have claimed my draw, put you on my ignore list and sent Feedback to the Site Admins so that you would be admonished for harassing another player during a game for following the rules. Do you also get mad when someone castles or captures en passant or moves their pawn two spaces on the first move? Bloody idiot.
In his defense, snortjp resigned as I was posting that, which I think is admirable.
09 Sep 08
Originally posted by mcstankbootyTaking a draw by perpetual check is the most competitive move and definitely in the spirit of competition if you're losing. It's the alternative that's spineless.
Here is the game log from the game I am playing with this joker. It will let you know how I feel:
Black says...
I try to make a draw.My only chance not to loose.
White says...
Yeah. That's not really a very sportsmanlike way out.
White says...
Come on, man. If you feel like you're going to lose, you should just resign.
Black says...
...[text shortened]... e game, but it's definitely not in the spirit of competition. It's a spineless move.
Why do you think your opponent should gift you a win when you blundered by allowing perpetual check?
09 Sep 08
A game of chess has 3 possible results: win,draw,lose.In this game you,mcstankbooty,were better in material but failed to prevent your opponent giving perpetual checks,therefore the result was a draw.By harassing your opponent with messages you obtained a win instead.And you call him a bad sport??
09 Sep 08
Originally posted by mcstankbootyI don't get it... About the game, I mean...
Check out our game to see that he went to perpetual check way too early: http://www.redhotpawn.com/core/playchess.php?gameid=5300486
White was leading materially, and black was about to lose. Then black suddenly found a draw combination, and put it going, a wonderful combination, a genius one!
And all of a sudden he resigned, handing over the victory to white, who greedily took the win and points.
What happened? I wouldn't do that after I found my rescue. I would offer a draw, sportmanly, and when proved that this leads to a no win for white, I would claim draw after three identical positions, and white could do nothing about it. The draw is blacks, obviously.
I might have miscalculated the combination, but if white didn't agree to the obvious draw, because white thought that he could actually win the game, then he have to prove it to me, neither more, nor less. In this case, white couldn't. Black should have his draw, fair and square.
So how did white win? Through whining. Not very honorably, not very sportly. He whined like a baby until he got what he wanted. A win, an unfair win.
Where's the next step? Whining for losing when material over? Whining becase white can make the first move in the game? Whining because the other wins of the only reason that he is better than you? So unfair, so very unfair! (*whine, whine*) So unsportly, so very unsportly! (*whine, whine*)
Where did I misunderstand the situation in this game?
Originally posted by mcstankbootyGame 5300486
Here is the game log from the game I am playing with this joker. It will let you know how I feel:
Black says...
I try to make a draw.My only chance not to loose.
White says...
Yeah. That's not really a very sportsmanlike way out.
White says...
Come on, man. If you feel like you're going to lose, you should just resign.
Black says...
e game, but it's definitely not in the spirit of competition. It's a spineless move.
You're clueless, dude. How dare you tell your opponent how he ought to play the game during a game in progress!? If you want to suggest something after the game, fine. But, to tell someone during a game that he's a coward for not resigning or for not attacking? Classless and stupid.
It's a shame that your opponent buckled to your pressure and resigned; maybe I'll PM him and advise him not to be browbeaten by punks like you.
And that you posted it to this board and expected sympathy for your argument is just a further testament to your cluelessness.
Edit: I just realized your opponent is the OP in this thread. snortjp: If you're reading this- what you did in forcing the draw was perfectly fine and, in fact, good chess. Don't let yourself be intimidated like this in the future. If you can win, try to win. If you can't, try to draw. Only resign if you feel you cannot achieve either result.
09 Sep 08
Originally posted by no1marauder+1
You're an imbecile. And a poor sport. Shut up and play rather than bothering your opponent with your nonsensical ideas about how they should play. If I'm losing and I see a way to force a draw, I do every time and so does every player who has any knowledge of the game.
09 Sep 08
1 edit
Originally posted by mcstankbootyArticle 15: The Conduct Of The Players
Here is the game log from the game I am playing with this joker. It will let you know how I feel:
Black says...
I try to make a draw.My only chance not to loose.
White says...
Yeah. That's not really a very sportsmanlike way out.
White says...
Come on, man. If you feel like you're going to lose, you should just resign.
Black says...
e game, but it's definitely not in the spirit of competition. It's a spineless move.
(d)
It is forbidden to distract or annoy the opponent in any manner whatsoever. This includes the persistent offering of a draw.
15.2
Infractions of the rules indicated in Article 15.1 may incur penalties even to the extent of the loss of the game (see Article 16.5).
http://www.chessvariants.org/fidelaws.html
and definitely includes insulting your opponent. I hope something is done about your vile behaviour.
09 Sep 08
Originally posted by mcstankbootyYou might want to consider playing on chess.yahoo.com. Your abusive behavior and ignorance of the rules of chess will certainly find the right environment over there.
Here is the game log from the game I am playing with this joker. It will let you know how I feel:
Black says...
I try to make a draw.My only chance not to loose.
White says...
Yeah. That's not really a very sportsmanlike way out.
White says...
Come on, man. If you feel like you're going to lose, you should just resign.
Black says...
...[text shortened]... e game, but it's definitely not in the spirit of competition. It's a spineless move.
Cheers
J34
09 Sep 08
Originally posted by mcstankbootyI love the part where you leave your King completely undefended, allowing the enemy Queen and Bishop to just come right in for cheap checks. And then you complain when your opponent takes advantage of your total lack of defensive skills. Is he supposed to just ignore your King sitting naked in the corner?
Here is the game log from the game I am playing with this joker. It will let you know how I feel:
Black says...
I try to make a draw.My only chance not to loose.
White says...
Yeah. That's not really a very sportsmanlike way out.
White says...
Come on, man. If you feel like you're going to lose, you should just resign.
Black says...
...[text shortened]... e game, but it's definitely not in the spirit of competition. It's a spineless move.
09 Sep 08
1 edit
Man, you guys are incredible, the way you descend on someone who doesn't agree with you. The way you play the holier-than-thou card while calling me names and telling me I don't know anything, it's amazing.
I stand by everything I said. I would love for any one of you to prove to me that, in this instance, that rule was being used in the spirit in which it was intended. I bet you can't. And that makes it a loophole, which again is a pretty cheap way to get out of losing--especially if it wasn't a guaranteed loss!
That's the kind of attitude that makes people feel like chess is only played by an army of Comic Book Guys more concerned with their stats and ephemera than the actual meat of the game (an attitude that's confirmed by your suggestion that I go play yahoo chess with the peasants).
Keep in mind that I'm only talking about my *actual* game with snortjp. He had a queen, a rook, a bishop and four pawns on the board when he jumped to perpetual check. To me that shows no interest in playing the game and only an interest in not losing. To bail out halfway through a game that you stand a decent chance of winning, yeah, that's cowardace.
09 Sep 08
Originally posted by mcstankbootyYou don't quite seem to understand. It's not just that we don't agree with you. It's that the facts are against you.
Man, you guys are incredible, the way you descend on someone who doesn't agree with you. The way you play the holier-than-thou card while calling me names and telling me I don't know anything, it's amazing.
I stand by everything I said. I would love for any one of you to prove to me that, in this instance, that rule was being used in the spirit in ...[text shortened]... lfway through a game that you stand a decent chance of winning, yeah, that's cowardace.
The rule (threefold repetition = draw) exists because in this case for example, it is impossible for you to get out of perpetual check. He just keeps forcing you to move your king around. You can't do anything about it, and he does not have any better, so it is a draw.
Else you would have to play the same moves over and over until the 50-move rule applies (if you don't know this rule either, it says the game can be declared drawn when 50 moves are made without any pawn moves, captures or loss of castling rights). Nothing will change however many moves are made. It's still a draw. Doesn't matter whether he intends to draw, or doesn't want to win, or whatever.
About the game in question; taking the perpetual check is his best option. Take into consideration that you are threatening checkmate on g7 as well as capturing his a8-rook with check. He can hardly do anything about the former, let alone both threats. I would not call that 'a decent chance of winning'.
I would say the way we descend on you is justified. If you would display the same behaviour in an official tournament, bullying your opponent into resigning, you would be lucky if the only thing that would be done about it was changing the win into a loss for you. There would also be a fairly large chance you would get kicked out of the tournament, and some possibility of being banned for a year or so from tournament play.
09 Sep 08
Originally posted by mcstankbootyYou were up the exchange with an advanced passed pawn, you had the initiative, and you were the higher rated player. Your opponent had every reason to believe that you stood a much better chance of winning the game than he did.
Keep in mind that I'm only talking about my *actual* game with snortjp. He had a queen, a rook, a bishop and four pawns on the board when he jumped to perpetual check. To me that shows no interest in playing the game and only an interest in not losing. To bail out halfway through a game that you stand a decent chance of winning, yeah, that's cowardace.
no1marauder was absolutely correct when he said, "If I'm losing and I see a way to force a draw, I do every time and so does every player who has any knowledge of the game"
09 Sep 08
1 edit
Originally posted by Mad RookMoreover, there was quite a nasty mate-in-one threat on g7, combined with a hanging Black Rook on a8.
You were up the exchange with an advanced passed pawn, you had the initiative, and you were the higher rated player. Your opponent had every reason to believe that you stood a much better chance of winning the game than he did.
no1marauder was absolutely correct when he said, "If I'm losing and I see a way to force a draw, I do every time and so does every player who has any knowledge of the game"
Oh, that's what Schakuhr already said. I was reading backwards. And what does it matter what the current state of affairs is on the board? Even if White was not threatening those things, there is nothing that stops Black from taking the perpetual check when it is possible.