- Joined
- 05 Aug 04
- Moves
- 219738
16 Feb 05
The tournament 'delayers' is also a bugbear of mine. I signed up to play chess and when you get though to a final round it's a bit annoying to find one selfish, up themselves loser delaying everyones pleasure because he thinks it's funny.
I saw one game where someone could have won but choose to push a pawn instead. That was the same as the tournament described above. All the other games were finished.
Maybe the admins should have the power to either A/ Force a result or B/ Warn the player as to his conduct.
And yes I know you can say provided he is moving within the tourno timeout rules blar blar. But that does not take away from the fact that it is a deliberate effort to spoil games.
17 Feb 05
1 edit
Originally posted by The Slow PawnOn the sieges, I'm still for the next two in line.
Sieges
...
c) In case the player won the siege game, have the lost player play forward as the winner (some kind of a lucky winner) - That way sieges wouldn't be disrupted
Reasons:
1) The loosing player lost and thus does not deserve to stay on-board (sieges take long enough as it is, and this is an oppertunity to move it along).
2) Similar to your tourney example Boris, what if both players become starless? By your siege rule (b), we are guarenteed no starless players in the queue, so promoting the next two to the board can't result in a starless player holding the board.
- Joined
- 05 Aug 04
- Moves
- 219738
17 Feb 05
Originally posted by rhbYes, but neither had a chance of progressing. They were both just being spoilers which is why something needs to be done about this type of person.
Is there not a case for the opposing player to also resign the losing position?
If everyone played by the spirit of the rules it would not be a problem. But continuing to play with just a king for example just ruins things for other people.
17 Feb 05
Originally posted by Grandmaster baterAgreed most definitely, but Ipersonaly feel the onus is more on the losing player in this position - as the eventual winner I can do what I like if controlling the board. Personally - I usually try to end it as quick as possible, but did once end up with 3 queens which was a bit OTT.
Yes, but neither had a chance of progressing. They were both just being spoilers which is why something needs to be done about this type of person.
If everyone played by the spirit of the rules it would not be a problem. But continuing to play with just a king for example just ruins things for other people.
🙂
18 Feb 05
Originally posted by QuirineThat's a pity, and judging by the high percentage of games skeeter has won against high rated players by T/O, its obviously a tactic that bears fruit for her.
b) People like Skeeter consciously disrupt tournaments
http://www.redhotpawn.com/tournament/view.php?tid=249
I'm not being funny but I bet there are lots of tournaments where Mrs. Skeeter deliberately moves once in a blue moon (in the vain hope to get a time-out). To support my point this particular tournament has 'finished' the first round except ...[text shortened]... ended 8 to 10 months ago..
So I'm waiting for my tournament victory for at least 8 months now!
One way of minimising the problem of delayed tournaments through pathetic people playing tactically to optimise their chance of getting a T/O is to change the tournie system a little. As soon as there is a clear winner from each group, then advance to the next round. Problem solved.
D
- Joined
- 05 Aug 04
- Moves
- 219738
18 Feb 05
I agree about the part where once a winner of a group is certain they should go 'green'. In that way the tourny can progress whilst they delay each other!
I have yet to see an example of this where a group winner or possible winner is concerned. It's only the 'also rans' that delay.
And back to the subject of the thread. I cannot understand why Trackhead is one minute standing for election for the cheat police and the next fails to re-sign as a member. Maybe he could enlighten us?
18 Feb 05
Originally posted by RagnorakI do not deliberately manipulate the time controls to achieve a T/O although I concede that it certainly could be interpreted that way.
That's a pity, and judging by the high percentage of games skeeter has won against high rated players by T/O, its obviously a tactic that bears fruit for her.
One way of minimising the problem of delayed tournaments through pathetic people playing tactically to optimise their chance of getting a T/O is to change the tournie system a little. As soon as there is a clear winner from each group, then advance to the next round. Problem solved.
D
I simply use all the time allowed in the game parameters to consider my position and coupled with my well known policy of "no reminders, no vacations and no extensions" I dont see what the fuss is all about.
I dont always get it right and have missed deadlines myself and have received the appropriate action, as expected but you dont hear me whinning about it.
I support the idea that when a round has a clear logical winner then that player/s should "go green" and progress leaving "us stragglers" to peacefully play on.
I'm sorry Quirine hasn't received the accreditation for the tourney win but the last match between Feivel and myself is at an interesting stage. Whilst Feivel has an advantage with correct play I think I can force the draw. I'm saying nothing that we have not already discussed OTB but please, no comments here.
I also reserve the right to play "lost positions" to nearly the end. That is how we learn to play endgame's, which is not my strong suite. I'm a tactical middle game player.
Hope this clears up a few popular misconceptions and if anyone has a real issue with my position, fell free to PM me but keep it clean.
skeeter
- Joined
- 03 Sep 03
- Moves
- 87628
19 Feb 05
Originally posted by RagnorakHow much fruit?
That's a pity, and judging by the high percentage of games skeeter has won against high rated players by T/O, its obviously a tactic that bears fruit for her.
Out of Skeeters last 295 games:
Timeout wins: 77
Non-Timeout wins: 160
Timeout losses: 8
Non-Timeout losses: 33
Draws: 17
Of course all of them but (1 siege game, won by checkmate) were tournament games. So they could have been auto-timed-out.
Still pretty amazing that nearly 32.5% of her wins are timeouts...
Aiko: I think the infamous "Skeeter's List" thread would have been more appropriate....
Not trying to rattle the cage, just got bored and started playing with stats...
--tmetzler