59 ( +1 | -1 ) Drawing etiquetteDeclining the offer of a draw by my opponent, I played on, but after a few more moves he posted this:
"Comment: (theblackpawn) I offer you a draw. Be realistic - your knight will never be able to cross over the board beyond the fourth rank!! I have managed to keep him at bay and the situation seems to prevail as such untill you face the reality. But I like your fighting spirit."
Does this kind of persuasion cross the bounds of propriety? What's your opinion?
(No comments on the game itself, please, which is still, at the time of posting, in progress).
32 ( +1 | -1 ) Well, over the board it would be unacceptable behaviour, because it would distract you when you only have limited time. In correspondence chess it's much less of a problem, also there's the problem that on gameknot you cannot get the arbiter and ask him to declare them game drawn... I just don't know...
35 ( +1 | -1 ) Seemsto be just a bit of friendly banter. Depends on the individual, whether there was any talk before etc. Its difficult to know when to draw the line when playing with strangers. I dont mind a bit of chat when playing, even the odd remark about a move..as long as it is done in a friendly spirit. OTB of course would be completely different...
73 ( +1 | -1 ) Written languageAs a general rule I try to ignore comments I find offensive. I always have difficulties with written language, because you can never really know how it is meant by the person who wrote you. Is it meant as a friendly comment? Or is it meant as an insult? If language is spoken you can easily identify in the way someone says it, how it is meant.
The comment you received can be read as offensive/rude, but also as a friendly/little bit humoristic comment.
So, ignoring the comment, this leaves you with the situation at hand. Is your game drawn: accept/offer a draw. If you still see something: play on. It is your decission.
Just as you do not always know how a comment is meant by another person. The other person can never judge how you see your chances in the game.
61 ( +1 | -1 ) Sounds like a bluffExpressions like, "Be realistic..." and, "...face the reality," have no place in a logical argument. The basic argument, "...your knight will never be able to cross over the board beyond the fourth rank!! I have managed to keep him at bay and the situation seems to prevail as such..." should stand or fall on its own strength, without the bluster. Even the double exclamation marks are bluster. If your opponent needs to bolster his argument with psychological arm-twisting, I would have to wonder how strong that argument really is. I can see why you might feel irate. His message was, at best, crass.
33 ( +1 | -1 ) Give the benefit of doubtI can't argue with anything that has been offered already. If you have talked before, then explain that you want to play on. If not then tell him to go pleasure himself with a object or thing of your choosing. Remember it smarts twice as much to lose a game you were offered a draw in
26 ( +1 | -1 ) DrawsI had a situation where we repeated the position 3 times. I asked for a draw'he said no I then refused to move, sent a e mail to the controler asking him to adjudicate on the position he declared it a draw This was on ChessWorld.net and it was a team game Yours John Hamer
11 ( +1 | -1 ) The outcomeMy so-eager-to-draw opponent timed out one move before he could have claimed a draw by repetition.
22 ( +1 | -1 ) A little bit of trash-talking is part of the cc game; don't let it get to you. As for drawing, play until YOU think the game is a draw. However, you look like an idiot losing a game where you offered a draw; so, at least consider it.
42 ( +1 | -1 ) drawsIn one of my recent games, I made a mistake and was down a piece. However, it was fairly early in the game and I thought I had a good chance to play on. My opponent, whose name I will not mention as to not embarass him, chastisted me for playing on and told me I couldn't possibly win by playing on. Well, lo and behold, I found a winning combination and defeated him.
I guess I could have made a comment back at the end of the game, but I prefer sportsmanship to oneupsmanship.
64 ( +1 | -1 ) hoss"A little bit of trash-talking is part of the cc game; don't let it get to you."
I disagree. Trash talking is and never has been a part of chess game (assuming you exclude internet chess sites like Yahoo or Pogo).
"As for drawing, play until YOU think the game is a draw."
"However, you look like an idiot losing a game where you offered a draw; so, at least consider it."
Why? Offering a draw (or declining a draw offer) doesn't mean you have "moral obligation" not to lose. It simply means you either believe the position will be drawn or want to split the point for other reasons (tournament standings etc).
27 ( +1 | -1 ) peppeProbably the phrase " trash talking " is a bit strong. I do think there is room for a little friendly banter though. We all spend hours on GK and I am gratefull now and then to find an opponent who injects a little humour into the experience. NB..I did say humour not just mindless insults.
7 ( +1 | -1 ) chatting during a gameI don't chat except to pass the time of day and to say welcome at the start of a game
12 ( +1 | -1 ) leo_londonFor sure friendly discussions are a part of (correspondence) chess. I assumed "trash talking" refers to something else...
44 ( +1 | -1 ) I havenever played " real " correspondence chess. However, as peppe pointed out, I would imagine discussions/chat would have been very much part of the whole concept. In the early days a letter would have been opened with eager anticipation, not just for the opponents next move but to hear the news from afar. Probably a romantic view, nice thought though.
38 ( +1 | -1 ) In the days.........when I played Correspondence Chess, we used preprinted cards with the moves entered on them, and the same tatty old window envelope over and over again with new stamps stuck over the old ones (plus a few free rides when the stamp wasn't franked by the Post Office). Anything less romantic would be difficult to imagine. :)
94 ( +1 | -1 ) Corr CommentsI've had some very good friends come from corr play. Both Postal and Online. (Met my own Dreamgirl here at GK :) Others seldom talked at all. But I always enjoyed the ones who did. Some of those would engage in "coffeehouse-like kibitzing" with me, their opponent. Trying in good humour to convince me its hopeless or drawn or .... to put the psychological screws to you, like in a friendly "skittles for blood" game :) ...and I agree a lot with leo_london 's comments about depending upon the individual. Two players might say the same thing and it be humorous from one and insulting from the other. I like the conversation during games. (Actually, now prefer it to the game, since I am not continuing active play). But could understand when my opponents dont want to , even if it is just because they want to keep a tournament-like atmosphere to their game. }8-)
34 ( +1 | -1 ) philaretusThanks, you crushed my nostalgic dreams..lol. Perhaps it was different back in the 19th century, when we were busy empire building. I just get this picture of some captain in the Queen's Hussars waiting months for the mail to arrive at some far flung outpost, containing the next move and news from home.
27 ( +1 | -1 ) snail mailIn Reply to Philartus,e-mail I used to play a lot of postal chess in the 60's when I was a junior It cost me 2d or 3d a letter It cost me 5 shillngs a week I had 5 opponent every 6 months mostly in the British Isles and odd one abroad I received 10 shilling a week but I enjoyed it a lot. John Hamer
20 ( +1 | -1 ) ccmcacollisterI guess we are just old-fashioned. I still get a kick out of the fact that I am playing maybe a dozen games with people from all over the world, seems a shame not to exchange a few pleasantries.
11 ( +1 | -1 ) I agreeIf you never chat that's fine, but then why not play a computer program and adjust the skill levels.