Free online Chess server. Play Chess now in a clean interface. No registration, no ads, no plugin required. Play Chess with the computer, friends or random opponents.
Sign in
Reconnecting
  1. Forum
  2. Lichess Feedback
  3. Losing on time, feeling it should be a draw, blaming the site

Hello,

recently Q&A posts of the form
"I lost on time when my opponent had only a bishop left, I leave lichess, that's not chess"
become annoyingly many.

I personally find the lichess design in that regard perfectly clear.
Contrary to some existing otb chess rules, when basically the arbiter has to decide if winning attempts are "reasonable"...

Some people seem to be very certain about their case being a draw. When in fact they would likely struggle to provide a transparent rule that automatically decides between a loss and a draw in all cases and which would be considered "fair".

Most people writing these posts seem to be somewhere between angry and misinformed. Anger issues could be solved by those people choosing a different time control or changing their general mindset. But information issues could be reduced by making the "when does timeout result in a draw on lichess" rule more visible / easier accessible.

Suggestion:
Would it be possible to transform one of the answers into a "Popular question", and link any such upcoming question to that very answer? People seem to think their case is special when in 99% of cases it's not and they are simply not aware of the rule used on lichess. Currently tags are not really helping since people use different tags for the same kind of question.
Even better might be a short info page mentioning a few standard examples like one blocked pawn or two-opposite colored bishops.
This could be provided as an extended answer in the Q&A format, or in some different format available on lichess.

Here is a small list of such posts (neither complete nor in any particular order):
lichess.org/qa/3934/is-a-sole-bishop-sufficient-mating-material
lichess.org/qa/4361/i-lost-on-time-when-my-opponent-doesnt-have-sufficient-material-bug
lichess.org/qa/5619/i-just-lost-a-game-on-time-when-i-had-the-only-pawn-and-my-opponent-only-had-a-bishop-and-nothing-else-impossible-what-is-gong-on
lichess.org/qa/4268/lost-game-when-opponent-has-only-a-bishop
lichess.org/qa/3580/why-dont-i-get-a-draw-when-my-time-flags-but-opponent-has-just-a-bishop-or-knight-and-i-have-a-bishop-or-knight
lichess.org/qa/4684/what-is-a-time-out
lichess.org/qa/4532/since-when-is-a-bishop-considered-mating-material
lichess.org/qa/3060/why-are-wins-considered-a-tie
lichess.org/qa/3137/i-lost-against-a-king-and-bishop-is-that-right
lichess.org/qa/2963/why-is-it-not-a-draw
lichess.org/qa/830/draws-due-to-insufficient-mating-material
lichess.org/qa/3283/why-is-this-endgame-not-rated-draw
lichess.org/qa/1791/game-is-over-and-i-got-draw-please-any-ideas
lichess.org/qa/180/time-out-results-in-draw
lichess.org/qa/4596/draw-with-insufficient-material
lichess.org/qa/4569/i-lost-the-game-that-was-a-draw

I do not know how to do it:

It reads in capital letters: „Thou shall not report cheaters in the forum!“ and what happens constantly?

Of course one cannot avoid the issue in its entirety.
Reducing the number of such requests, and reducing the length of subsequent discussions is possible.
I can't find a hint "with capital letters" for the issued topic.

Sry! With exclamation mark and red letters!

thank you for your insightful contribution

Can we have some system, in which in timeouts with KB/KN an explanation somehow appears?

Can we just get a system where anytime someone posts something like that their hard drive is automatically deleted?

Or, anytime someone posts like this @thibault automatically gets a dollar from their bank account.

This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.