Recently I was watching the world championship match between Ding and Ian Game 14. At the end it was clear draw but no player was offering a draw. In fact, Ian was just letting time run out to make moves, which won't do anything to prevent draw but will just irritate the opponent. If I do something similar in online chess, like not resigning but letting time run out or irritating opponent I get banned. What's the difference between the two, if the end goal leads to irritation of opponent?
It is not stupid. It is a psychological tactic.
That is why you get banned for stalling on Lichess.
Lichess rules do not necessarily apply to world championship games.
That is why you get banned for stalling on Lichess.
Lichess rules do not necessarily apply to world championship games.
@InkyDarkBird said in #2:
> It is not stupid. It is a psychological tactic.
> That is why you get banned for stalling on Lichess.
> Lichess rules do not necessarily apply to world championship games.
Then which rules are more correct; Lichess or world championship? Or will you answer that both are correct in their sense?
> It is not stupid. It is a psychological tactic.
> That is why you get banned for stalling on Lichess.
> Lichess rules do not necessarily apply to world championship games.
Then which rules are more correct; Lichess or world championship? Or will you answer that both are correct in their sense?
That is up to you to interpret.
Otb chess rules are a bit different from online chess.
@Shiroyasha47 said in #1:
> Recently I was watching the world championship match between Ding and Ian Game 14. At the end it was clear draw but no player was offering a draw. In fact, Ian was just letting time run out to make moves, which won't do anything to prevent draw but will just irritate the opponent. If I do something similar in online chess, like not resigning but letting time run out or irritating opponent I get banned. What's the difference between the two, if the end goal leads to irritation of opponent?
It isn't a clear draw, you could easily lose from both sides if playing against a master level player, and even at super GM level, it was not a easy endgame to defend for Ding, there were still chances for Nepo, Ding was playing for a draw, and nepo was pushing for the win. The wernt running down the clock. They were calculating several variations, and it probably wasnt irritating to either player, because as you said, none of the players offered a draw, if they were irritated, they would have offered a draw way earlier.
On the other hand, you would just get up and walk away and come back to see you lost by timeout.
> Recently I was watching the world championship match between Ding and Ian Game 14. At the end it was clear draw but no player was offering a draw. In fact, Ian was just letting time run out to make moves, which won't do anything to prevent draw but will just irritate the opponent. If I do something similar in online chess, like not resigning but letting time run out or irritating opponent I get banned. What's the difference between the two, if the end goal leads to irritation of opponent?
It isn't a clear draw, you could easily lose from both sides if playing against a master level player, and even at super GM level, it was not a easy endgame to defend for Ding, there were still chances for Nepo, Ding was playing for a draw, and nepo was pushing for the win. The wernt running down the clock. They were calculating several variations, and it probably wasnt irritating to either player, because as you said, none of the players offered a draw, if they were irritated, they would have offered a draw way earlier.
On the other hand, you would just get up and walk away and come back to see you lost by timeout.
@Shiroyasha47 said in #1:
> In fact, Ian was just letting time run out to make moves, which won't do anything to prevent draw but will just irritate the opponent.
Really? He *did* let run out his time? So he lost on time?
> If I do something similar in online chess, like not resigning but letting time run out or irritating opponent I get banned. What's the difference between the two, if the end goal leads to irritation of opponent?
You will not be banned, if you make your moves in time. Only if you regularly lose on time after having spent a big amount of your time in the last or second to last move, you may be banned.
> In fact, Ian was just letting time run out to make moves, which won't do anything to prevent draw but will just irritate the opponent.
Really? He *did* let run out his time? So he lost on time?
> If I do something similar in online chess, like not resigning but letting time run out or irritating opponent I get banned. What's the difference between the two, if the end goal leads to irritation of opponent?
You will not be banned, if you make your moves in time. Only if you regularly lose on time after having spent a big amount of your time in the last or second to last move, you may be banned.
In OTB its way different since well, the player is right in front of you, there are refs, and first of all, just stalling will make you look very bad OTB, and as I mentioned before, there are refs. On online youll be considered some random goofy person who gets angry out of nothing. On online psychological tricks have way less efects, like coughing and others, maybe thats why lichess does that. Might I mention that it was a looooong game, so stalling there is more like thinking, as said before by somebody, Ding-draw, Nepo-win (for what they were playing)
But that game lasted like six hours, didn't it? If you find somebody willing to play a six hour long game online, I don't think he's gonna be mad that you take 20 minutes to make a move, because he's gonna be doing the same thing.
@Shiroyasha47 said in #1:
> What's the difference between the two, if the end goal leads to irritation of opponent?
Maybe your end goal is to bother the opponent, but theirs is to make the most out of an opportunity. You play to increase a number in your profile, but they play for money.
@Shiroyasha47 said in #1:
> What's the difference between the two, if the end goal leads to irritation of opponent?
Maybe your end goal is to bother the opponent, but theirs is to make the most out of an opportunity. You play to increase a number in your profile, but they play for money.
The debate may be about 2 different things.
"Letting time run out" in computer chess usually refers to stopping playing when in a hopeless position but not resigning, which is unsporting.
In the debate here the players did not stop playing but carried on making moves, which is not unsporting.
"Letting time run out" in computer chess usually refers to stopping playing when in a hopeless position but not resigning, which is unsporting.
In the debate here the players did not stop playing but carried on making moves, which is not unsporting.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.