It's bad behavior, but only possible because of the blind premove, which is already a form of criminality against the spirit of chess, institutionalized by the server--somewhat like organized games of chicken with cars. If your opponent is willing to play reckessly by premoving, you are motivated to do so as well in order not to cede him an advantage in the game. In OTB play, the blind premove has no equivalent, for if your hand is hovering over a piece, your opponent can more or less see what move or moves you might make. A fair online equilvalent might be to broadcast the premove, or at least light up a limited region of the board near the source square.

Since the advent of the Fischer clock, however, playing blitz in sudden death time controls by itself invites unjust results, or at least unnecessarily random ones. It's like gambling: I'm sure it has its pleasures, but I'm not a fan.

Really fitting to the topic: GM Naroditsky is releasing a video series about dirty tricks in online chess these days.


(link not allowed to post)

Who cannot watch it: In this video he explains, how to play with 10 sec each or less: E.g. offering a trade of a pawn/minor piece, but instead of recapturing , you should attack the opponents queen. Because the opponent will likely make a premove in this scenario, you will win material with this idea.

Why making these bs videos, instead of writing an article, how to be a good sportsman in online chess? Naroditsky is praising these tricks, as if it would be extremely intelligent to play for these tricks and that it would be a great achievement climbing up the rating ladder using these unsportsmanlike advices.

Not surprised, that online chess becomes more and more disrespectful, if even the operator of chess sites like chess.com promote these kind of articles.

Resigning is a bad idea if your opponent really might stalemate you, or really might not know how to win with king and rook. Fred Wilson once annotated a move in one of his books with dry humor: "children do not resign."

But waiting for your time to run down during your final zugzwang as your opponent is systematically checkmating you, then returning to make the last move just before you flag? If a coach taught that to kids, he'd be a true corrupter of youth.

Luckily, such petty monstrosities are so rare over the board that they aren't worth much thought.

trw wrote on 10/08/19 at 01:37:24:


No serious coach teach such behaviour.

But I often see recommendations on the net, of never give up until mated. Maybe even some coaches teach such?

Seeley wrote on 10/10/19 at 15:46:16:


It's only by your assumption that the notion of being dead lost comes into the equation at all.  Since I did not mention it, why should you infer it?   If I had been dead lost, I wouldn't consider being checkmated much of an oversight.

I rather get the impression that some people here are trying a little too hard to justify their bad behaviour online.

Monocle wrote on 10/10/19 at 14:59:07:

That's not the situation you described only if we are to assume that you overlooked mate in one in a position where you weren't dead lost. You didn't specify that, so I didn't assume it.

So let's make the assumption you intended us to: it may well be the case that your opponent thought you were dead lost before the mate-in-one oversight occurred, even if you didn't think that. I'm sure at least some of these incidents occur because of a gulf in strength between the two players: the stronger player gets annoyed that his opponent is wasting time by playing on instead of resigning, when in fact the weaker player isn't strong enough to realise how bad his position is; or alternatively, the weaker player gets annoyed when he thinks he's been clearly winning for some time, when in fact there were still resources for the defender. So the situation you described isn't altogether clear-cut, because it doesn't take into account the possibility that you and your opponent might have assessed the position completely differently.

Seeley wrote on 10/10/19 at 00:14:12:


Exactly. Why not resign in time instead, it is just online chess.

But I only run down the time when the opponent has played on and refused to resign and still won't do it when there is mate in one, not when it was overlooked.

The funny thing is that the very same people that refuse to resign appropriately, just pushing "wood", often get very upset when I refuse to offer a rematch...

Jupp53 wrote on 10/09/19 at 20:53:40:


If I've overlooked the mate on my turn, who's to say I'm ever going to see it on theirs?  Running the clock down instead of playing the mate as soon as they spot it, like a normal person, just demonstrates bad character.