A question for the room.

[knightmare]

In the thread about players who purposely time out, I said that I might deliberately procrastinate in my replies in an inferior position in the hope that my opponent might “lose the thread.” Greg seem to imply this was analogous to “sneaking back in and pressing the clock while the other player wasn't looking” and “isn't the way a game of chess is supposed to be decided.”
My question to the room is:
Is my procrastination a fair tactic.? Is it “fair” to use the clock in an attempt to throw off your opponents timing? Is trying to “psych” like this OK? After all, poor use of the clock is the reason I have 100 days(for example)to complete the game and he has only 14. And the reason I have an inferior position.
OR…. Is this tactic akin to “sneaking back in and pressing the clock while the other player wasn't looking”
Seriously curious how others feel about this.
Hate to think of myself as a sneak. Not that that will stop me.

[ecperreault]

.

[knightmare]

LOL! Thanks , I knew I could count on you for thoughtful reply.!

[islanderfan]

Knightmare I agree i think with you. The clock is there for a reason. So the game doesn't go on forever. If a player can't control his time, but then cries about losing should only look at himself. I am one if I am a few min. ahead and/or in a losing position, I won't resign, will take the time win. Especially if it is that snot nosed Eugene!

[ecperreault]

.

[gmiller]

There's a fine line between abandoning a game (or making your opponent think you have) and strategic use of the clock. When a player is low on time with a winning position, there's another rule called "Insufficient loosing chances" that will allow them to draw or even win when low on time when no add time or delay is used. And there's the "Insufficient mating material" rule that allows a player to claim a draw even after loosing on time. These rules show that the purpose of the clock is to keep the game moving, and not to decide the game.

I had a game here that I lost on time due to the fact that I let my clock run down considerably lower than my opponent's, and there was no add time. My opponent started making moves at 2-3am (my time) in order to win on time. The end was a time-out by me with a mate in one on the board. I had set my clock to go off at 4am, but when it actually did, I decided sleep was more important. I could have claimed a draw since my opponent only had a king, but didn't bother to mess with it. The important thing is that my opponent didn't abandon the game, he kept moving. In short, he had to pay just as much attention to the game as I did. If there were no abandonment rule, the winning player would have to remain attentive to the game for a long period of time, while requiring no effort on the part of the abandoning player.

[knightmare]

Thanks for your replies, I feel better already and to ecperreault,
You sir are one of the most delightful and engaging posters to come this way in a quite a while and I invite you to disrupt my posts (rare as they are) anytime you are so inclined:) I didn't join the Zapper tourney but followed & enjoyed your unbiased reports every day. Good stuff:)

[islanderfan]

you should have joined knightmare!!!

[ecperreault]

Thank you, sir. Please join next year's! Promises to be bigger and better! Lot's of fun... and maybe a game or 2 of Chess too.
Comments like that keep me... writing.
Greg?! Was that you? Huh, ain't that something... small world, eh. Oh! Sorry I read it wrong, I thought you were talking about losing on time at an over-the-board tourney. Never mind, my mistake.
I'm off to play some chess at this great site. Cliff is waiting for me to Resign a half-dozen of games to him! Nya, nya, nya, Cliff - I have learned a GREAT tactic today! I will tell you all about it... let's see, I got 126 days to move, 31 days in that month, err, carry the one... Yup! How about April 1st. LOL! Ya, on April Fool's Day I will tell you all about my new strategy in our chats. LOL