GRAHAMTRUE: master of game abandonment.

mateau · Post by **mateau** » Tue Mar 31, 2009 1:54 pm

It seems that Grahamtrue wants to be #1 for moves played or games played or some other obscure and totally meanlingless statistic. He is #1 for "Top Move Player". He is over two weeks behind at move three in the 6 player match that I organised recently.

Furthermore he has 264 games started and is two weeks behind on most of his moves. He has also only played three or so moves in each of the games that he is in arrears.

This seems to be a contentious issue with many players. Perhaps solutions need to be found.

GMiller's policy may in fact be rewarding such behavior because it is not punished.

Any game started as a rated game should end as a rated game. Whether lost, won or drawn or abandoned.

However, players who abandon early games should be punished by having their rating reduced 2x. And the server should keep track of the ISP address of that individual and reduce all of his ratings for all Net-chess profiles. I've watched players on ICC and Playchess.com play "themselves" using a throw-away profile to advance their rating.

It is pretty sad when people play just just to increase their rating rather than to enjoy the game.

The time control menu box could also have another option: Penalizing delayed play.

The easiest way is to have a time delay exclusion similar to the rating exclusion. Players who abondon games or delay games could be excluded. This could be an additional player history: average number of days per move or percentage of unfinished or abandoned games, or games lost on time due to unresponsive play. The organiser of a match should have the ability to "UNJOIN" players who have a history of unsportsmanlike play.

30/2 is a pretty good correspondence time control. However a delay of game penalty of after 7/-2 each day (or 5/-3) might induce players to be a bit more responsive. Also after the second instance of a 7 day delay then then the 30/2 changes to 30/0 for the offending player. This could be an additional time control option.

Or if a game is being unreasonably delayed then the Tournament director, GMILLER and the claimant player could agree upon a time control to close out the game: reducing both players time to 5 days after the first 7 day delay. The problem with this solution is that GMILLER just may not want that much involvement.

Time outs during play are inderstandable and sometimes unavoidable. But ANY play in ANY game or match during a requested time out immediately ends that time out period and forfeits any more time outs for the games and matches currently being played.

Or why not just have another Top Ten: the leaders in Game abandonment or time control losses.

These are just ideas that may help solve the problems of unreasonable delays in clearly won positions while at the same time convince players to not start what they do not intend to finish.

Any penalty for delay or abandoment should be part of the time control at the beginning.

Post by **gmiller** » Wed Apr 01, 2009 2:57 pm

For someone with 675 games going, and only going for two weeks without a move in only a few games, I find that pretty amazing. If you pull up all of his games and sort by last move, you'll find the very vast majority have had moves in the last few days, and most of the ones that haven't are ones where his opponent is on the move. I know I couldn't keep up with that, and I'm not going to question his motives.

As far as reducing ratings of abandoning players, or rating games that clearly shouldn't be. My goal is to have the ratings as accurate as possible. I don't see how having someone who's actually at 2700 strength have a rating of 1350 helps anyone. Rating every time out at move one as a win would turn the rating system into just a measurement of how many games you've played, since most games actually end that way.

True, it's not a perfect system, but it works fairly well, is easy to understand, and is easy to implement.

I would like to implement more time controls. My main sticking point is it's going to make the user interface a lot more complicated.

langelli · Post by **langelli** » Wed Apr 01, 2009 8:39 pm

I looked at Grahamtrue's profile to findout he's played 4,542 games, and only timed out of 18 of them. I have to cut him some slack. He does finish his games. OK, he is slow to move in some games, but as long as he finishes them I don't have a problem playing him. He doesn't seem to hide from games in which he is behind. Those are the people that get my goat.

cliff · Post by **cliff** » Wed Apr 01, 2009 11:18 pm

Heck guys, you've all read my rants on this topic, so I won't go into them again!

BUT -

- only 18 timeouts out of 4500+ games is insignifigant, in my mind! I try hard to respond on the day I recieve a move, but 4500 games from now, I'm sure I'll have at least that many also! No doubt things happen.

For time-out champ, look to someone like 'nerveraking' with 608 games, and 270 (!) timeouts - there's championship calibre!

Pax!

mateau · Post by **mateau** » Wed Apr 01, 2009 11:31 pm

Personally I am annoyed but not particulalry aggravated by game delay tactics. But I do consider them rude and unsportsmanlike conduct.

When a rated game is started and abandoned then the ratings should reflect the outcome. Ratings seem to be the carrot. All correspondence rules state that as well as over-the-board play. The Chessbase (PlayChess.com) site only allows an aborted game before you make your first move.

Why not let the players decide? Why not put a toggle in the time control box to "Score ALL Games" begun after move 1.

However if a personal emergency disallowed play that would be a reasonable consideration.

If someone needs to withdraw or needs a delay due to a personal emergency then that of course should be granted, but for ALL games being played. A Withdrawal is a complete withdrawal of ALL games for that player, not just the "cherry picked games". Any game reaching move 10 can be delayed but no more games can be started before the end of the withdrawal period or before play is resumed.

Regarding Grahamtrue:

In the match that I am playing 11 of his games are over two weeks behind at move 4 or less and one is over one week.

A time control that reduces time for delaying play might keep players from biting off more than they can chew.

A 30/2 with a -2 for every day after 7 not replied. There is no reason to wait more than 5-7 days for a response. If a player has 1000 games going, then that is his problem not mine. Loosing a game on time is not the same as timing-out. Allowing the time to run out when you could have simply resigned should be discouraged as it only serves the purpose of the loser.

Another time control would be 10 moves in 10 days. Then 30/2, with delay of 7-2.

This gets us past the 10 move "grace" period. But I still think all games should be rated.

Another solution would allow the Match organisers to unjoin players who use game delay tactics.

There are several threads on-going regarding this issue.

The question is do poeple want this to change or not? Is GMILLER open to suggestion for possible remedies including rating all games begun regardless of outcome?

I am in favor of ALL rated games being scored correctly. The rating pool here at Net-chess is about 600 points high, this just might bring it closer to parity. While that is generally recognised I'm sure, rsating are not the purpose of this particular thread.

I am also in favor of a time delay penalty for not responding to a move. This should be in the time control from the beginning and would be a -# of days for each day after the move deadline. This would also end games quickly for those who refuse to resign but also don't move in lost positions.

cliff · Post by **cliff** » Thu Apr 02, 2009 10:52 pm

mateau wrote: I am also in favor of a time delay penalty for not responding to a move. This should be in the time control from the beginning and would be a -# of days for each day after the move deadline. This would also end games quickly for those who refuse to resign but also don't move in lost positions.

Interesting idea....Actually, I kinda like it!

cliff · Post by **cliff** » Thu Apr 02, 2009 10:54 pm

gmiller wrote: I would like to implement more time controls. My main sticking point is it's going to make the user interface a lot more complicated.

I can certainly see that point, Greg. But since everyone here is bright enough to play chess, I'm fairly certain they'd be able to figure it out!

iamachessstudent · Post by **iamachessstudent** » Sat Apr 04, 2009 3:37 pm

I just hope we can all enjoy and keep playing Chess!
Things are never and will never be prefect...and we can all agree to disagree over one thing or another again, nothing is perfect!
I am enjoying the Site so far...its not too demanding or difficult..and the ppl, as a rule are nice so hopefully, there will not be TOO much conflict..I hate having to leave a site because of petty and picky differences and dislikes of a few and not the whole.
I guess we shalll see...

killerwolf · Post by **killerwolf** » Thu Apr 09, 2009 2:25 am

I have never had any problems playing grahamtrue at all. Plus at 600+ games he's handling at once, just wait your tuen, man...life's too short for such non sense.

kw

grahamtrue · Post by **grahamtrue** » Sat Oct 17, 2009 2:52 am

hi
I enjoy this site and have experienced a lot of things and a lot of nice people.
I don't believe I have to put up reasons why I am behind [all past tense now] in any games if they have a limit and I am still not timed out eg computer not working/internet is lousy/slow as it is in my country.
you join a game with conditions and you stay within the rules-I can't see that I am the master of abandonment and to splash it all over this forum was in bad taste and quite rude but i forgive ya mate cos you don't know all of my circumstances.
And the focus on those 18 games...wow ! They were not games that I abandoned ....from memory they were those games you sign up for with no time controls on your moves.I didn't realise this at the time of signing up. I didn't get to the internet everyday and fell behind but I also noticed that at least one of my opponent's times were not reducing but I was losing a day everyday.

cliff · Post by **cliff** » Sat Oct 17, 2009 4:27 am

We've never played, Graham, but as I said back when the thread was still going strong, I don't think that only 18 time forfeits out of all your games isn't what I would all excessive! I tend to think that perhaps Mareau was juat having a bad day when he started the thread, and you were the unlucky target of his mood.

I'd certainly be willing to play you sometime, and I wouldn't anticipate you running from a game, as was implied. I've only played 200-some odd games, and I know what it's like when somehow, after a few days, you end up timing out. It's happened only twice to me, and when I logged in that day, and saw I had forfeited, my first response was to wish I had appologized to my opponent! It was karenb, by the way.

So, to all, have a nice day, and let's let bygones be bygones, and I don't think anyone is pulling a fade-out, at least not on this accusation!

islanderfan · Post by **islanderfan** » Sat Oct 17, 2009 6:05 am

good lord really?? Another one Jesus H Christ....

timagal · Post by **timagal** » Wed Mar 17, 2010 2:32 am

Well, I personally think that the timeout limit should be shortened from 10 to 5 moves. There is plenty happening within ten moves and some players just let the game timeout not to look too bad...

dparmet · Post by **dparmet** » Wed Apr 07, 2010 2:24 am

I recently played Grahamtrue in a game where he could have resigned on move 19 (I would have if it was me). He played on until move 50 in a hopeless position. It was his right to do so. He moved quickly too. I don't know why he wanted to but nor do I care. I don't see any problem with this behaviour. I find it odd and nothing more.

Net-Chess.Comhttps://www.net-chess.com/phpBB2/

GRAHAMTRUE: master of game abandonment.

GRAHAMTRUE: master of game abandonment.

delayed play; timeouts and abandoned games.

Re: delayed play; timeouts and abandoned games.

I have never abandoned a game