Originally posted by GatecrasherWow that is to bad, resigning when they cannot win it all.
Not only those who get timed out. There is also a tendency for some players to resign all their games in a tournement when they no longer have a chance of winning it. To me, that is an abuse of RHP.
When players start games, they "owe" it to their opponents (and to everyone else using RHP) to play their games out to their best ability. and to abide ...[text shortened]... s really do make a mockery of the rating system. But finding a solution is not an easy matter.
I guess that is a draw back with internet chess, unlike OTB
where when someone loses they simply withdraw and the
other players play other players or get byes.
Kelly
Regarding the ratings hit that a high-rated player might take after getting massively timed out, one solution I've seen by at least one chess federation (sorry, don't remember which one) is a rating floor. That is, once they reach a certain rating (I think the one I saw made it every round hundred) their rating would not go below that, no matter how badly they did after. I'm not sure I like it; but, it does have some good points in controlling this sort of abuse of the system.
With the odd exception, I always take the timeout.
A tournament is not between you and your opponent: it is between all those signed up. When you do not take a timeout, you are taking that choice on the behalf of all those people, not just yourself. Given the somewhat silly length of tourneys in the first place, refusing to take a TO is not so much manners towards your opponent, but a lack of manners towards all others in the tournament.
Outside touneys, I've only hit TO when my opponent has gone AWOL.
Ah... I was wondering what had happened to Dustnrogers - his rating has dropped to around 800 last time I checked, and I'm facing him in two clan matches and a tourney at the moment.
Still, I'm personally reluctant to time him out myself (from an honourable conduct point of view, even though he's kicking my arse), but then I do see the point that in a tournament situation the slowest player holds up the rest of the round... which I suppose is what the auto-timeout is meant to deal with (I 'won' a couple of tournament matches against someone else this way just recently, but it's a lot less satisfying...)
I guess one answer might be a cap on the number of consecutive tournament games that a player is allowed to participate in, maybe based on their timeouts in past tournaments? Or is that a bit beyond RHP's tracking ability..?
I take TOs without exception. A TO is no different from the rules of play by the clock. Exceed the time and you lose. Of course there are glitches and problems as well set out in this thread and no easy solution.
I believe a player should be automatically TO'd in tournaments as soon as the timeout period is up - not leave it for a couple of days.
Originally posted by ArielUKI like that idea, not sure if its possibl but if it is it would be very nice. At first I though you were saying limit the amount of tournaments which would suck because I enter alot of tournaments and play alot of clan matches but I always play within the time limit, actually I make well over 100 moves per day lately. I hate when tournaments are held up because 1 stupid person is stalling, it would be nice to be able to keep those people out if they have been timedout alot.
Ah... I was wondering what had happened to Dustnrogers - his rating has dropped to around 800 last time I checked, and I'm facing him in two clan matches and a tourney at the moment.
Still, I'm personally reluctant to time him out myself (from an honourable conduct point of view, even though he's kicking my arse), but then I do see the point that in a ...[text shortened]... based on their timeouts in past tournaments? Or is that a bit beyond RHP's tracking ability..?
Originally posted by jayaitchAgree. I often have a couple of skulls in my list. I don't like timing them out and I don't like them not moving. Time them out automatically I say - or at least provide the option under these rules.
I take TOs without exception. A TO is no different from the rules of play by the clock. Exceed the time and you lose. Of course there are glitches and problems as well set out in this thread and no easy solution.
I believe a player should be automatically TO'd in tournaments as soon as the timeout period is up - not leave it for a couple of days.
Got a really sarcastic message from a tournament player who put his vacation flag up and went on holiday a few days ago. Accused me of bad sportmanship - I was reasonably restrained in pointing who had timed him out. He never replied or apologised.
The whole time out thing causes more accusations than anything else. A timebank should be adeqaute to cope with taking a break.
Never forget that some of the players you accuse of 'stalling' within their timeout periods CAN be players who don't see that you will win.
Those players play on to see you finish it off, wich can be instructive for them. Others don't think you can win and wait for you to offer a draw.
I also have some games in wich i see i cannot win, but i do play on to see how my opponent is going to finish it off, because i don't see how it's possible.
I had an opponent who didn't think it was possible for me to checkmate with just a king and rook. He/she messaged me with just that, and i replied it was possible. I didn't mind playing that out completely, and was glad to be able to learn something to that opponent.