lichess.org
Donate

Don't you think this is unfair?

Many people just lose the game and their rating to underrated people just because of their internet connection!!

Take this game for example:


Just because of my internet speed , I couldn't move my pieces and thus my opponent wins!!

This is so unfair.

Don't you think that this should be stopped?
Like then Lichess should stop the game and give no one rating points?
Well, @StrikingRaptor
First of all, it is impossible to know if the opponent left the game on purpose or lost because of their internet connection.
So, Let things be the way they are. If you have a bad internet, don't play such fast games.
@The_Troubled_Patzer , the opponent is getting his rating points by beating the player due to his/her network speed. Is this not unfair?

If you had your rating points taken away due to your network connection , you would also feel that it was unfair.
I'm not playing when my net's bad , I'm just telling from the guy who played's perspective
1) Do I understand right, that you are suggesting not to penalize the players, who loses due to their bad connection? Then I can turn off my wi-fi every time I'm gonna lose points, can't I?
2) If you are suggesting to do this only in winning (for that player, who has a bad connection) positions, then should it be the mate in 1? Mate in 4? Mate in 20? What about missing the mate in 1? Average and even more skilled chess players often miss it or don't expect it and premove. So which positions do you consider as "won" ones? Can you solve all mate in 1 chess puzzles in 2-3 seconds? But what is more important, can EVERYONE do it? I think no
3) Lichess has already the option for players, who loses connection during the game (not the bullet one though) or leaves by other reason. In this situation Lichess offers to the remaining player to choose: claim victory or take a draw (also this player always can just give up - it could be fair in some positions). I consider this option as an optimal option in such situations, and you?

This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.