@pn2206 In that game I could see that my opponent was going for the all queens approach, which I knew would possibly result in stalemate. Plus there was no visible checkmate, at least to a premoving me. And with such low time, there was always the hope of a stalemate. This is completely different from a visible mate in one, where one realizes that there is no hope for stalemate.
@MrScribbles I checked the Lichess terms of service and didn't see anything on the winning side stalling. Could you quote where you see this? Plus it wouldn't be annoying clock stalling if the opponent has the ability to easily end the game. Its not like the winner is waiting forever for the loser to make a move. In this case the loser can easily end the stall themselves.
@jonesmh @MananGirdhar21 @kingdave2 I'm really just curious as to the rules on the situation. I know I get frustrated when it happens to me, but in my opinion the opponent has the right to do so.
Maybe they are hoping for stalemate
My brain initially leans towards potentially delaying 5-30 seconds, where I don't see much harm. In blitz and bullet, you don't have much time, so you normally can't wait for long.
@Funkmaus mentioned some good points, though, that didn't occur to my mind. I normally give them the checkmate anyway, but just to look back over it and punish trolls, but I now I see that there are also people who want the game to end with a checkmate.
I am a supporter of people playing on down a piece, or a rook with the queens on(I've saved these sorts of games and lost them), but without the queens, it becomes harder, and in an endgame, I have a point were I think I've played long enough. Other people might have different points, and that's fine with me. Some people might like the game to end in checkmate, and I shall try to avoid rejecting them that resolution to the game.
I thought this forum thread is about the thing that i discovered - when i have a winning position i try not to spoil it and play better moves so i burn more time on good moves - whereas when i think i'm worse i try to play instinctively and can overcome my oponent thanks to this even in worse position.
I just want to add to this thread that there already is a topic of 300 moves limit - if somebody tortures you for over 299 moves the game will end in a lichess-draw :) - not sure if other platform also got it. Can provide a link if you wish
i can barely follow the logic in the OP........................ so, if a guy is about to be mated, he's SUPPOSED to resign because he is obviously lost in one move???? wow, i never heard that one.......... sometimes i actually don't resign when i'm about to be mated, figuring whatever --- he can mate me, or i can resign, maybe he'd prefer it if he mates me.........
but to be the clear winner in one move, and expect your opponent to know that you expect him to resign --- i can't see that.
Running out the time before mating in one is a hugely a**hole move and I don't care why you're doing it. I'd hit that block button hard enough to break my mouse.
I've never cared about when/if someone resigns.
@Thaxiss @Triangel @pawnmulch I'm not advocating this at all. More that it happens to me and I'm curious about Lichess' rules on the matter. So far I haven't seen any link or quote to a rule saying this isn't allowed. @pawnmulch I'm not at all saying they are supposed to resign. I'm saying that the stalling wouldn't be the same as if the losing opponent is stalling, because the opponent has the opportunity to end the stall with a resignation. So I'm curious as to how the rule/etiquette changes. I was only asking for people's thoughts on the matter. Not for comments like 'Checkmate ends the game unless your name is Developmentals'.
The "you" wasn't meant for you personally, but whoever might be doing this. I understood you weren't advocating for this action.
There are no rules, the one running out on time loses. As you can't guarantee that the person who ran out on time, knew that there is mate in one
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.