After classic games I do not accept rematches, because I want to rest for a while and to think
about the game which I have just played. Especially after lost games I want to think - where did
I do mistakes?
because we don't want to. doesn't matter why.
@a_Tauri I'd be surprised to find a player not interested in besting their opponent. You are playing to win, no? The better player wins, no? You play to win the game but not beat the opponent? Personally I don't see this as possible.
A loss hurting one's ego? Not my meaning. When I lose to player A I may say to myself "I think I should have/could have done better against this skill set" and I want to test that. Ego is not the issue. If you are an archer and come out to a range one day you will be testing your ability to gauge wind and distance to place your arrow in the bullseye. If you shoot once do you leave? If you box an opponent do you stop after one round? Stop a tennis match after one game?
I understand that people often go online for one game, many do not.
@JBark said in #33:
> You are playing to win, no? The better player wins, no? You play to win the game but not beat the opponent?
>If you are an archer ...If you shoot once do you leave? If you box an opponent do you stop after one round? Stop a tennis match after one game?
>
Incorrect and somewhat naive comparisons. An archery match doesn't end after a hit, a tennis match doesn't end after a game, a boxing match doesn't end after a round. The chess game ends when there is checkmate. It ended at that precise moment. It concludes. It doesn't continue. What comes next is ANOTHER game.
I see you didn't get what I meant. I meant that it satisfies me to win the game, and that one opponent is as good as another. If I lose I don't feel the urgency to continue playing to establish at all costs which of the two is actually better; he was better IN THAT GAME and that's enough for me, congratulations and goodbye.
Because 90% of people trade everything off and by move 15 we're in rook + pawn endgame. Don't need to play this boring garbage more times than I need to.
@a_Tauri Naive? Isn't it better to limit your comments to what I say? You misunderstood and misquoted what I said about archery. I described target shooting, not a match. Each round is scored in boxing. In tennis multiple GAMES are played. In a many chess matches two players may face each other in 20+ games. I have seen on youtube a young lady that is quite skilled face chess players in parks (New York I think) and usually beat them. I see her often offer a rematch.
How complex is the game of chess? How many openings in common use are there. How different is your game when you play white or black? As a continuing student of the game I like to evaluate my performance. By playing the same opponent I can determine various aspects on my game. A few minutes ago I played someone, we were even approaching endgame. I botched up the end and lost. My opponent granted my request for a rematch and I mated him easily. My opponent then requested a rematch and we played a third. I again beat this player easily. I learned from this. I affirmed that my first loss was due to my bad endgame. I reach this conclusion by facing the same opponent, the same skill level. Againn, this a learning experience.
"...establish at all costs which of the two is actually better..." At all costs? I assure you I don't want any to give up life of limb in pursuit of another game. At all costs?
@JBark
Well, yes there is some misunderstanding then, because I fail to get your point.
I will try to explain mine better, as much as my knowledge of the English language allows.
What I want to point out when I participate in threads similar to this one is essentially the following:
There are many reasons ( all legitimate ) why one does not want to grant a rematch. What I have expressed, answering to your message because it gave me the opportunity, is just one of many : FOR ME and many other users, the challenge with the opponent ends in ONE SINGLE game.
Well, I do not dispute your considerations such as the one on the difference between playing as white or as black, nor the fact that, as you say, you benefit from playing with the same opponent, nor your idea of a match which consequently should consist of several games. Respectable ideas, to which I have no objection.
What I didn't quite understand from what you say ( and which perhaps I misunderstood ) is whether, on the basis of these ideas, you believe that granting a rematch should be felt as a kind of obligation by everyone : if so, then I would have much to object. You will understand that this is the fundamental point, because many people claim a rematch from the opponent as something due, and dozens of threads are opened on the "Problem", always with the same recriminations.
Therefore, to help me understand, I would just like you to answer this question, simply and directly :
let's say that one day we meet to play, I win, you ask me for a rematch and I politely don't grant it to you. How do you take it ? Do you simply accept it, or do you complain ? Do you think that refusing is a natural and correct action or do you judge my behavior unsportsmanlike ?
This is what I'm interested in knowing ( if you want to answer, otherwise it doesn’t matter ).
@Toscani said in #8:
> Most players know about the touch rule and see rematches in the same way. For me the rematch offer sounds like a request to take back the moves and have a second chance.
Rematch has literally no correlation with takebacks. Takebacks are against the spirit of game while playing rematch is within the spirit of game.
> When we do not know the player, rematches typically will make me unhappy, and regretting to have accepted it. I find it best to not accept a rematch from a stranger.
When there are million of users at website then who isn't the stranger? Ridiculous!
And why would rematch make one unhappy.
Rematch is just another game irrespective of result of previous game.
> For others they may feel they won decisively, so no rematch. There is no rule or obligation to play a rematch.
Yes, but denying when there is literally no reason for one to refuse rematch is illogical.
> The game is over when the game ends.
Ever heard of series of matches. Have you seen different sports like cricket, football, hockey?
> Don't play twice with the same player, when there are others waiting in line to play.
Are you some famous player or streamer that others want to play with you and are waiting in line? Lol!
In response to the post #38
Rematches correlate with take backs ! Take backs is not against the spirit of the game at least not in casual games, while asking a rematch can be. If it was the opposite more players would be requesting rematch. It's ridiculous to quote in small parts what others have already read in the prior posts. And why would rematch not make a player unhappy ? They have a chance to play against a player they lost already. It's ridiculous to compound the negative feelings.
Requesting a rematch is disrespectful in accordance tot the previous results. Let the loser ask for a rematch not the winner. A player won so there is no need for a rematch, unless a player analysed the game and discovered a blunder or a mouse slip was claimed during the game. Analyse the game first and if there is reason to play again then send a rematch. It's illogical not to review a game first.
When pressing the quick pick, it's not a tournament or a series of matches that I want. It's called quick pairing for a reason. I don't like to drag out the games until it becomes best 2 out of 3 games. There is not rule for that approach. When using the quick pairing, it's for one game. Find a friend to play more than one game, not with a stranger.
You asked: Are you some famous player "Yes" or streamer "No" ... that others want to play with you "Yes" and are waiting in line "Yes" Lol!
I feel obligated to accept a rematch, especially if it is a blitz/bullet game. I don't do it as much in rapid.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.