.. Sorry, for misunderstanding your plea for help 'NC.' And, I assume, this is the game U wanted posted.

 

this shocked me, thanks buzzkill! Fierce and I went back and forth on the philosophy of a speed game, and i told him he has to beat me on the board as well as the clock, and he was offended that I did not resign like a "gentleman". I told him i would never change. The actual game i wanted to submit was of the 25,000 i have played very inspiring, exhasting, frustrating, scary, uphoric. It was my game vs rompery where I mate on h2, could you put that up and then people can tell me if was a good effort worthy of submission and perusal. Thanks.

 The clock is part of the game. You have to give mate in the allotted amount of time.

thanks Ecotopia for siding with me, this is how i view the struggle also, especially when a game is played under faster time controls! The CLOCK and the board have sway regarding the outcome. This is the very interesting point that I have encountered, and that is that fierce is not alone in chastising me not being a gentleman and resigning. I have played with a queen down, i have played with king against 2 queens and a rook (!), i won the first, and drew the second. There is a culture of chessplayers out there who resign when they are down significant amount of material, and totally diregard the clock, even if they are winning there!!!! This to me is some kind of absurd funk of defeatism and I feel a liittle bad, because I see the other guy actually believes in his cause, (that I should resign if losing on the board) wholeheartedly. What do other people think? It semms to go 50/50 right down the line.

I don't play g/2 because I get my ass kicked all the time but if I did I would be on your side - the clock is part of the game.

About, 20 years ago; I wrote to the U.S. Chess Fed. {'powers-that-be'}; Suggesting, that the number of 'draws' in chess, could be reduced, perhaps signifigantly; If, Two time-controls {slower & 'standard'}, were to be in effect, {at the players' discretion}; And in the event of a 'draw'; The player who opted, for the faster 't/c' would be awarded, six-tenths of a point; Compared to his/her opponents, 'four-tenths.'
 
They've had this method done in 'boxing'; {if not in those precise numerical terms}; As in: Joe Smith, 'won' a 'decision' {or 'tko'/technical knockout}, over his opponent 'so-and-so.'
 
But, to get back, at the subject at hand; For the most part; I concur; That 'the clock' {as it were}, should prevail, in 2-minute games; With the only provisos, being: If the player whose clock did Not 'run out' at the end; Does Not have enough material to 'mate'; Then, he or she, should Only be rewarded, 'six-tenths' of a point, {opponent: 4-tenths}.
 
This method, especially; In a multiple 'speed-game' match, {between 2 players}; I believe, it would make for a 'fairer, all-around' {plus more accurate!}, tally; Of each player's respective skill, at that {whatever}, speed-chess, time-control!
 
Ps. Yeah; I Know; I'm an unheralded, 'Genius'! --

This particular game is why I won't be playing chess with NightClub again. He and I have had many wonderful games over the years, but now he has decided to start running his king around at the end of a game in order to "win" on time and gather more points for himself, deserved or not.

It is sad to me when people begin to care more about their own rating than sportsmanship to their fellow player. You take time out of your life to share in a game with someone, and this is how they return the favor. Funny, though, how in all my years of playing chess over-the-board and in-person, not one time has an opponent done this... it's a phenomenon I've only ever seen online.

This really is a problem of the ego. In my mind, a rating is a tool to gauge how well you've been playing. Once inflated with points derived from making moves that a monkey could make, it no longer serves such a purpose, but rather only to make a player seem better than he really is to others (and to himself). I'd rather be underrated from showing sportsmanship than overrated from being an egotistical sourpuss any day.

At any rate, I'm sure NightClub won't have any shortage of fellow idiots to play around here. Between the run-your-king-around-to-try-to-win-on-time fools and the use-a-computer-program-to-win-the-Nova-tourney jerks, Internet chess sadly has more abuses than virtues. It is these people who take a beautifully poetic game which vacillates between dramatic flashes of genius and heart-wrenching strokes of stupidity, and ultimately turn it into just utter crap.

Sincerely,
-f


p.s. During the course of this particular game, which I was playing on my break from work, I had two co-workers barge into my office asking for help on various topics. So the argument that I was using the extra time to "think" is as much b.s. as was the outcome of the game. Just to preemptively make that clear.

In addition, NightClub, I think it is somewhat telling how you're looking to the community for a justification of your behavior. The interactions in this game was between the two of us. I simply won't play you again-- it doesn't matter to me what anyone else thinks about it, it is my decision. There are plenty of people to play who don't feel that the G2 time control is a license to throw sportsmanship out the window, and I'll stick with playing those types of people. Thanks.
 
-f

firce, i just want to add that i made an inquiry about posting a game to the analysis section. Your game got thrown up there because Buzzkill was trying to be a friend and do me a favor. I simply thought that well, since the game got posted, i might as well make mention about our ongoing debate, which has been a tiny thorn in my side, since i started playing internet chess. That is, do I try to win by the clock also or just give up. I simply reasoned that ok, giving up when your down material is a "gentleman" thing to do when your playing 30/15 or slower. But at g/2 all those rules break down, AND I FELL SINCERELY SAD THAT YOU CAN'T SEEM TO DRAW A DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE TWO. AT G/2 anything goes because anything can happen. In a slower time control, forget it, i wouldn't stand a chance and the only gentlemanly thing to do would be to resign.

So, at what point, exactly, do these rules "break down"? 30/10? G/10? G/5? G/4? G/3.5? Like I say, G/2 isn't and shouldn't be a license to throw sportsmanship out the window. If your position is completely unwinnable, be a man and just click "resign". You'll be okay, I promise-- no one's going to think you suck. It's still a lot easier and far friendlier than moving your remaining king around ad nauseum. At any time control, Chess is Chess; and that can either mean a sporting game, or complete asshattery... your pick.
 
-f
 
 
 

g/2 is simply about who has the fastest browser period.So if you want to play a game of who has the fastest browser why complain when someones browser is faster than yours?It is what it is.G/2 IMHO should be a totally seperate rating category.

For whatever it is worth I have played Nightclub in g/5 and he has an incredibly fast browser.I know before I play him that if the game gets down to the end his browser will beat mine.Big deal.

Big deal is right. This was strictly communication between the two of us. I will never understand why people feel the bulletin boards are their own personal catbox.
 
-f

Recently; Another player launched a 'mini-tirade' against a fellow 'Caissian,' for perceived {his own}, unsporting behavior; Because he didn't either, 'offer-a-draw' or resign, {forgot which}; As a result, of his own game-clock, was about to expire.
 
Anywho; The 'pissed off' player, alluded to... Wait a minute!
 
........................................................................
 
In so many words; I recognize 'scapegoating' a much smaller Non-problem; When the accuser, obviously has above-average 'pressing,' 'Real Life' issues, he's trying to 'deal with'; When I 'see it'! ..{if something walks, moves, and 'quacks' like a duck; The chances are; It's a Duck!} --

Dude. What galaxy?
 

G/2 is for fun. When the game breaks down and it's over, i usually resign - depending - but i never expect my opponent to resign. i usually laugh when i know my opponent wins in those 'running' situation and of course the games degenerates into a scramble - but it's interesting to see how people handle the pressure - and i smile knowing my opponent may be half-way across the globe with his heart racing saying 'yessssssssss!' when i run out of time - but i'll getcha the next game with very high probability! :P
 

Nicely said pal!....from one fast player to another.