Originally posted by Mephisto2
Nice game.

Have a look at
31. ... Rb1+ (instead of Rxa5)
32.Kxb1 (forced) Rxa5 and unavoidable mate with Ra1.

edit. My apologies for commenting on a game in process(I didn't read evrything). The point I made, however, is completely irrelevant to the game continuation.

I saw 31...Rb1+ at the time but thought that the move that I played (31...Rxa5) forced mate as well, which it didn't. I was extremely annoyed with myself when I realised that I had let him escape.

Originally posted by Mephisto2
Nice game.

Have a look at
31. ... Rb1+ (instead of Rxa5)
32.Kxb1 (forced) Rxa5 and unavoidable mate with Ra1.

edit. My apologies for commenting on a game in process(I didn't read evrything). The point I made, however, is completely irrelevant to the game continuation.

I hated to start a new thread, and I realise this is somewhat off topic. But I was hoping someone could answer a quick question. I don't play tournaments, Usually just one or two games with someone. But what is the standard procedure in choosing colors. I have always just flipped every other game. But is it winner choice? Loser's choice? Or the one that issues the initial challenge? Is there any edicate? I don't know why I don't know this but I just don't. I suppose on the first game it is challengers choice but what of any others.

Originally posted by cashthetrash
I hated to start a new thread, and I realise this is somewhat off topic. But I was hoping someone could answer a quick question. I don't play tournaments, Usually just one or two games with someone. But what is the standard procedure in choosing colors. I have always just flipped every other game. But is it winner choice? Loser's choice? Or the one that ...[text shortened]... I just don't. I suppose on the first game it is challengers choice but what of any others.

Standard procedure on RHP? I suppose that switching colors every game is proper.

Originally posted by cmsMaster
Standard procedure on RHP? I suppose that switching colors every game is proper.

Thanks, that is how I always played the game. And to me it really doesn't matter a lot, but would it be improper for a challenger to continue to choose white even if that challenger continues to loose? It is not so much that I mind terribly but it somehow seems a little bit rude and greedy and slightly unfair. But there really is no set rule is there? I know I am not required to accept the game, but if it were tounnymet... what then?

Originally posted by Mephisto2
Nice game.

Have a look at
31. ... Rb1+ (instead of Rxa5)
32.Kxb1 (forced) Rxa5 and unavoidable mate with Ra1.

edit. My apologies for commenting on a game in process(I didn't read evrything). The point I made, however, is completely irrelevant to the game continuation.

The game was over by the time you commented.

Originally posted by cashthetrash
Thanks, that is how I always played the game. And to me it really doesn't matter a lot, but would it be improper for a challenger to continue to choose white even if that challenger continues to loose? It is not so much that I mind terribly but it somehow seems a little bit rude and greedy and slightly unfair. But there really is no set rule is there? I know I am not required to accept the game, but if it were tounnymet... what then?

Tournaments are usually (maybe always?) set up on RHP so that you play everybody in your group twice; once as white and once as black.

Originally posted by Fat Lady
This is an example of unsporting:
Game 1829578
The first game I started on this site. Since then I've started and completed 38 others! This guy kept moving once a week, just before the deadline, and now is in the process of using up the last few hours of his two week timebank.

I don't see the problem with that. I admit it's annoying as hell, but you opponent is perfectly entitled to do whatever s/he want's with the time control. It's not as if your a non-subscriber and the game is using up one of your 6 games.

Would you think it unsporting for an opponent in an OTB tournament to use up all their time control?

Originally posted by irax
Would you think it unsporting for an opponent in an OTB tournament to use up all their time control?

The equivalent in an OTB game to correspondence chess super-slow-moving-when-lost would be playing against a fast-moving player, who, one move before he's about to be mated, leaves for the pub. There's 1 hour 45 left on his clock and you have to sit there watching it tick by. He comes back in with a minute to go, offers a draw, and then as his flag falls shrugs and puts out his hand with a grin. Would you consider that unsporting?

Originally posted by TommyC
The equivalent in an OTB game to RHP super slow moving when lost would be playing against a fast-moving player, who, one move before he's about to be mated, leaves for the pub. There's 1 hour 45 left on his clock and you have to sit there watching it tick by. He comes back in with a minute to go, offers a draw, and then as his flag falls shrugs and puts out his hand with a grin. Would you consider that unsporting?

That's a good example and I agree with that. However with RHP, you make a move and then life moves on, you can manage to go out and have some fun before coming back to make your next move, If it's a big problem then don't play in games with such large time controls.

Originally posted by irax
I don't see the problem with that. I admit it's annoying as hell, but you opponent is perfectly entitled to do whatever s/he want's with the time control. It's not as if your a non-subscriber and the game is using up one of your 6 games.

I'm not sure if you meant that tongue-in-cheek, but I'm not a subscriber and so this game did indeed take up one of my six slots.

It was a mistake agreeing to such a slow time control, this was the first game I played on the site and I didn't realise how slow it would be. Since then I've been careful to only play one move a day or one move every three days games.

The comment about playing an OTB game very quickly and then waiting until the flag falls when in a lost position reminds me of a game I saw between two IMs once. One of them was in a badly losing position and so deliberately waited for half an hour until he had less than five minutes left so that he could blitz his opponent (i.e. not write moves down). As far as I recall this tactic didn't work and he lost anyway.

Originally posted by Fat Lady
The comment about playing an OTB game very quickly and then waiting until the flag falls when in a lost position reminds me of a game I saw between two IMs once. One of them was in a badly losing position and so deliberately waited for half an hour until he had less than five minutes left so that he could blitz his opponent (i.e. not write moves down). As far as I recall this tactic didn't work and he lost anyway.

lol, the idiot. Who was it, do you recall?

Originally posted by TommyC
lol, the idiot. Who was it, do you recall?

It was a long time ago, but I think the opponent of the one who waited was Mark Hebden (before he became a GM).

Originally posted by TommyC
The equivalent in an OTB game to correspondence chess super-slow-moving-when-lost would be playing against a fast-moving player, who, one move before he's about to be mated, leaves for the pub. There's 1 hour 45 left on his clock and you have to sit there watching it tick by. He comes back in with a minute to go, offers a draw, and then as his flag falls shrugs and puts out his hand with a grin. Would you consider that unsporting?

Just go down to the pub with him and you wouldn't miss out on anything. 😀