Hi,
are there any automated checks to flag people who on purpose let their clock run out when they are in a losing position?
On my last game against mali_0231, (s)he was losing (mate in 1) and let the time run out until about 20 seconds before the flag. Then, they offered a draw(!) and once I declined, they played the only possible move that led to checkmate.
I had warned them that there is only one possible move and that I will report them if they didn't play it once I noticed the stalling. So, here we are. Nevertheless, I and others would like to avoid people with such behavior in the future and flagging them could be automated. Would you be willing to look into this?
If you compare it to offline chess:
Your opponent acted more or less inside the set of rules. In contrast you annoyed and threatened him/her somewhat.
I cannot recommend talking to your opponent. Never. Make your moves, offer draw/decline draw, call the arbiter in case of rule violations. Finish your game and start the next, this is an professional approach.
So in offline chess it is OK to be in a position where there is a forced checkmate on the next move and instead of giving up or just playing, you wait until the clock is almost run out, then offer a meaningless draw and only at the last seconds you make a move that allows the game to end.
I would have complained also in real life. Even if it is not a written rule, I don't think it is in the spirit of the game. At the end of the day, they only had one possible move and they spent for it as much as the rest of the game.
And to avoid any misunderstanding, I am not complaining about genuinely slow players. I am one of those. Quite a few of my recent games were lost due to time outs. I am just complaining for cases like the one above.
I would not start a war which I cannot win.
Simply get over it and next game, please. ;)
"I and others would like to avoid people with such behavior in the future and flagging them could be automated"
Tell me, how precisely would this work? How much time is too much that a player should be banned?
3 minutes in a position where there is only one possible move. Not ban, since as said this is not a rule of the game. Just mark them that they exhibit this behavior.
It's legal to think as long as you like in every position. Thinking bout resigning, draw offers, playing on, finding a magic rescue...
There's no lever.
"3 minutes in a position where there is only one possible move. Not ban, since as said this is not a rule of the game. Just mark them that they exhibit this behavior."
How do you prove they realize there is only one move?
How do you prove they didn't get taken away from the computer by something for a few minutes?
Play shorter time limits, or accept that at the time limit you play, you are committing yourself to a game of up to a certain length.
It's incredibly annoying when people do this, I don't mean to imply otherwise. But there's nothing really that can be done about it, other than choose different time controls if you wish. That's why the time controls exist.
I don't mind spending more time because the opponent wants to think. Actually, this is great and I enjoy it while playing chess. I do mind when the opponent does it on purpose.
I wonder what is the fundamental difference that when a player gets disconnected, the other player is given the option of claiming either victory out draw, and this appears to the user profile, compared to what I suggest.
In any case, I am grateful for lichess in general and I don't feel entitled to any request. If this is controversial in your opinion, feel free to ignore the request. I thought the request would be quite trivial and wildly accepted.
...If that is needed, this system could be applied only to people with more than say 1500 points. I guess it is reasonable to expect them to be able to find the only legal move, in the same way every forum poster is expected to be able to find a mate in 1.
"I don't mind spending more time because the opponent wants to think. Actually, this is great and I enjoy it while playing chess. I do mind when the opponent does it on purpose."
I promise you, your complaint is in no way ambiguous, and everybody understands the problem you are talking about. The point is, unless you have a solution that is capable of allowing for this distinction, it's pointless. You agree to the time control.
