08 May 09
Originally posted by tansjeI know it's hard not to resist sometimes, but there's definitely a valid reason to not discuss games in progress. I'm interested in hearing what you think your flaw was. Please post it here after the game finishes.
I am sorry, I did not know that there was a rule. Now that I think of it, it is logical as you could get help for games in progress. Although in this case the help would be for my opponent due to my own remarks :-)
Thanks,
Steve
08 May 09
Sigh, I now have learned that the game does not automatically considers a game drawn when two kings happily roam the field together...
Note: do not let me write that book I mentioned earlier.
As to the flaw, be patient, it seems that our two kings have to wander a moment longer before deciding they really cannot checkmate each other.
08 May 09
Originally posted by tansjeif the kings are alone on the board, just press the 'claim draw' button, and the draw will be awarded on the grounds of insufficient material.
Sigh, I now have learned that the game does not automatically considers a game drawn when two kings happily roam the field together...
Note: do not let me write that book I mentioned earlier.
As to the flaw, be patient, it seems that our two kings have to wander a moment longer before deciding they really cannot checkmate each other.
09 May 09
Originally posted by Kewpiehe should have been able to claim the draw on his last move then, regardless of whether his king captured the last remaining material or not. this suggests that tansje may not be aware of the 'claim draw' function.
I think you can only claim a draw when it's your move, and tansje may be waiting a while for that to happen.
10 May 09
I understand it, and I could have easily used the claim draw box.
Instead I thought that the site would automatically end the game with a draw if you have two kings only on the board.
Who knows, maybe I will even be able to claim a timeout win, something I would not do normally but in this case against an opponent with so many games I might ruthlessly press the skull.
10 May 09
3 edits
Originally posted by tansjewell, i can sympathise. i'm playing awaldbaum, who played moves very frequently when he was in a good position, but now that he is on the verge of losing, has decided to stonewall. i've sent one polite message, which has been ignored. and i thought under-13s weren't permitted on this site! i feel sorry for people who are so emotionally stunted that they have to resort to such tactics.
I understand it, and I could have easily used the claim draw box.
Instead I thought that the site would automatically end the game with a draw if you have two kings only on the board.
Who knows, maybe I will even be able to claim a timeout win, something I would not do normally but in this case against an opponent with so many games I might ruthlessly press the skull.
edit: this site could really use a system for rating players according to fair play, quick moving, courtesy, etc.
11 May 09
Originally posted by BlackampPost a thread in Site Ideas and if you get enough support there they'll do it. That's one forum you can be sure Russ reads.
well, i can sympathise. i'm playing [b]awaldbaum, who played moves very frequently when he was in a good position, but now that he is on the verge of losing, has decided to stonewall. i've sent one polite message, which has been ignored. and i thought under-13s weren't permitted on this site! i feel sorry for people who are so emotionally stunted that t ...[text shortened]... d really use a system for rating players according to fair play, quick moving, courtesy, etc.[/b]
11 May 09
Originally posted by Kewpieyeah i might do that. i've noticed that there is a fair bit of complaint in the forums about people acting in an unsportsmanlike way. if Russ can be bothered implementing something like this, great. On the other hand, i've had a bit of a laugh at awaldbaum, knowing that i outplayed him at the board, and if he needs to play off-board point-hoarding games to compensate and shore up his no doubt fragile ego, good luck to him. Moving on. It's not like i'm not winning games and racking up points elsewhere.
Post a thread in Site Ideas and if you get enough support there they'll do it. That's one forum you can be sure Russ reads.
12 May 09
Originally posted by BlackampSo why are you harassing a player moving within the time limits?
well, i can sympathise. i'm playing [b]awaldbaum, who played moves very frequently when he was in a good position, but now that he is on the verge of losing, has decided to stonewall. i've sent one polite message, which has been ignored. and i thought under-13s weren't permitted on this site! i feel sorry for people who are so emotionally stunted that t ...[text shortened]... d really use a system for rating players according to fair play, quick moving, courtesy, etc.[/b]
Players often take longer when the game is in the middle/endgame position.
If you have the game won, why worry. The points will come to you in due course.
12 May 09
1 edit
Originally posted by adramforallSo why are you harassing a player moving within the time limits?
So why are you harassing a player moving within the time limits?
Players often take longer when the game is in the middle/endgame position.
If you have the game won, why worry. The points will come to you in due course.
This question stems, i think, from a view that as long as a person obeys the letter of the law, their conduct is beyond reproach - a view that i think is mistaken. There are plenty of ways in real life that someone can behave poorly without breaking any actual laws - recklessly farting in an elevator in which other people are present, for example. Do you really want to say that that is fine, since it's not actually against the law to fart in an elevator? In my opinion, awaldbaum is behaving in a mean-spirited fashion because a) he was moving quickly before; b) his green dot is often on, so he has time to play; c) when he got into serious trouble, he just stopped making moves; d) he didn't respond to a polite invitation to make a move; e) he's not playing that many games - and so on.
Another response would be this: since i am staying within the rules of the site with my posts, why are you questioning them? If i can't question awaldbaum's behaviour, then you can't question mine.
Players often take longer when the game is in the middle/endgame position.
True, but this isn't a terribly difficult position to work out.
If you have the game won, why worry. The points will come to you in due course.
I don't care about the points - i'm winning plenty of games. It was just momentarily annoying - but you're right, it's not worth bothering with further. There are small-minded people in the world, and sometimes you just have to deal with their sad behaviour.
13 May 09
Originally posted by Blackampa) Speed of earlier moves is irrelevant - he may have been free at the time and able to move quickly, and now have other things to do which limit his time to play.
In my opinion, awaldbaum is behaving in a mean-spirited fashion because a) he was moving quickly before; b) his green dot is often on, so he has time to play; c) when he got into serious trouble, he just stopped making moves; d) he didn't respond to a polite invitation to make a move; e) he's not playing that many games - and so on.
Another response woul ...[text shortened]... ded people in the world, and sometimes you just have to deal with their sad behaviour.
b) green dot means nothing - mine is never shown but I am still online and play frequently.
c) He just wants to think about options
d) Maybe he doesn't understand English or just decided to ignore a request to make a move. I know anyone that asked me, politely or otherwise to move would be ignored and added to ignore list
e) 61 games in progress is quite a few
Another response would be this: since i am staying within the rules of the site with my posts, why are you questioning them? If i can't question awaldbaum's behaviour, then you can't question mine.
I was merely pointing out that sending PM's to a player asking them to move when they have plently of time to do so could be considered harassment. This could potentially get your account closed under Section 3c of the Terms of Service.
Another thing is he may have looked at your profile, seen the mass of timeouts and then decided to stop moving until a similar episode happened.
14 May 09
1 edit
Originally posted by adramforalla/b) I think what you mean to say is that the absence of a green dot doesn't mean anything. A green dot, however, does mean that he has made a move in the last 10 minutes, and given the frequency that his dot is on and the duration that it generally stays on, he is not short of time to move.
a) Speed of earlier moves is irrelevant - he may have been free at the time and able to move quickly, and now have other things to do which limit his time to play.
b) green dot means nothing - mine is never shown but I am still online and play frequently.
c) He just wants to think about options
d) Maybe he doesn't understand English or just seen the mass of timeouts and then decided to stop moving until a similar episode happened.
generally i don't care how long someone takes to move (but i crush any skulls i see), and this is the first time i've PMed about it, or even sent a reminder. and it is solely because he was moving fast, still plays a lot, and stopped moving in our game just when his position started to looked really bad.
as for your harrassment comment, sorry but that's just laughable - no-one in their right mind would consider a single polite reminder 'harassment', especially when the system itself provides for reminder emails to be sent. if clicking on the little envelope isn't harassment, how could a polite PM be?
if he is waiting for a timeout, that's pretty sad. there's a world of difference between crushing a skull that appears, and hanging on to a lost position in the hope of one day seeing one. it's generally only mediocre players who have to do that - better players know they can increase their rating by winning games, and braver ones are willing to try. incidentally, i was unable to play for a while for medical reasons, and had no complaints about being timed out.
as i've stated before: whatever. i've devoted as much time to this individual as i'm inclined to. let him hang on to his precious points for the time being if it makes him feel he's a better player than he is.
14 May 09
Originally posted by sbacatForgive me for intruding in the discussion :-)
I know it's hard not to resist sometimes, but there's definitely a valid reason to not discuss games in progress. I'm interested in hearing what you think your flaw was. Please post it here after the game finishes.
Thanks,
Steve
I have just finished my game with Atri, it was a tough decision, taking the draw at a rating of 1334 or waiting for his rating to go up, as he certainly is a better player than that. However, waiting was tricky as well, any moment could be 'mass skull moment' (shiver) and his rating could have gone down to 500!
After hours of nailbiting I decided to take my loss, encouraged by the above discussion and a feeling that maybe I too was taking my rating a bit too seriously :-)
As I said earlier, my 'clever' move had a flaw. The plan was moving my king next to his pawn, instead of taking it. Thus he had to take my pawn and then I could remove the last. Unfortunately, the game went on and our kings kept glaring at each other on an empty board.
The flaw was that instead of taking my pawn, he could have moved his pawn two squares forward as his pawn was still on the first line, something I completely forgot. In that scenario, he could have easily taken my pawn, walked his pawn to the finish line and turned this game into a rather painful defeat...
Luckily, probably due to the blinding speed with which Atri has to move, he noticed nothing. In fact, he did not claim the draw either, thus I had the choice of claiming the draw.
I love it when a plan comes together.
Hmm, maybe I need to get myself a hobby...
Game 4398774