Sep-06-09 | | minasina: Zero moves: 0-1, why? |
|
Sep-06-09 | | DCP23: GM Shaposhnikov was late for the start of the round and was forfeited. |
|
Sep-08-09 | | Knight13: I don't like this "come late, you forfeit" rule.
It's not that hard to do something to your opponent to turn him into a straggler. He wouldn't even suspect it. |
|
Sep-10-09 | | DiscoJew: [Knight13: I don't like this "come late, you forfeit" rule. It's not that hard to do something to your opponent to turn him into a straggler. He wouldn't even suspect it.] Very good! You could send a very sexy girl for example, his way, on the metro perhaps, with the goal of flirting and delaying. You could flatten his car tires or put sugar in his gas tank. The possibilities are endless and I am beginning to think this rule IS too harsh. Late games often provide flair anyways, as a guy throws everything and the sink at the guy with only 30 mins left, or they both do! |
|
Sep-10-09 | | ajile: If you are late you lose. I like the rule. How hard is it to turn an alarm on? |
|
Sep-10-09 | | ycbaywtb: well, you probably can't call ahead either to say 'hey, i'm running late' even when it's legit, they should allow the clocks to start and run out if necessary, boring for the player present, but an easy victory nonetheless |
|
Sep-11-09 | | utssb: <If you are late you lose. I like the rule. How hard is it to turn an alarm on?> There are many other reasons that a person could be late, and plenty of them are legitimate. This rule is entirely stupid. Chess already has the perfect mechanism for punishing a player who arrives late. Their time runs, the more late they are, the more time they lose. |
|
Sep-11-09 | | ajile: <ycbaywtb> <utssb> I suppose you are right that your idea is the most accurate rule. The problem is that the player waiting gets to just sit there and do nothing for 2 hours. Not fun and who wants to go to a tournament and not get to play? The plus of the current rule is that this player simply wins the game and can then go play speed chess in the lobby. :o) |
|
Sep-12-09 | | OneArmedScissor: <ajile> If the opponent showed up on time, the player would still have to sit their for at least 2 hours anyway.
Not a very good argument. |
|
Sep-13-09 | | ajile: yes but he's PLAYING A GAME.
lol
My argumewnt wins. |
|
Sep-13-09 | | Starf1re: Brilliant opening play! |
|
Sep-19-09 | | OneArmedScissor: <ajile>
Playing a game is irrelevant to your argument.
Your point was that he has to sit there and that this is the problem. Well... he'd be sitting there anyway and arguably for longer if he actually was playing a game.
Moreover, you mentioned the fun aspect.
Sorry, but it's funner to win a game by sitting at the board for 2 hours as opposed to sitting at the board for 4 hours and losing. |
|
Sep-21-09 | | ajile: <OneArmedScissor:> Maybe for you but you don't speak for everyone. Some people play for the enjoyment and not just the prize money. |
|
Feb-02-22 | | JimmyVermeer: I for one hate the "come late, you lose" rule. Just start the clock and if time runs out before the player arrives, then he loses. |
|
Feb-02-22
 | | fredthebear: One more argument against the horrors of Communism. Everyone mills about like a herd of overcrowded sheep, afraid of the clock on the wall. A person can't relax beforehand. It causes a fellow to dribble down his leg in a hurry to zip up. People smash into each other to get to their tables when pairings are posted. Such zealous TDs don't get my return business! (Are you listening in Oklahoma? They have some old chess Communists in Oklahoma. Just play in Dallas or St. Louis and screw the nitpickin' Sooners.) A late disqualification does discourage the idiot standing on his head in the corner for a pre-game warmup, but that laughable scene usually puts folks in a good mood, so why not encourage such gymnastics. Besides, there's always the chap that had a helluva time w/street directions and finding parking because he's never been on location. Just start the clocks and let the slowpokes play catch up like normal. We're all gonna be here awhile. |
|