that is what bullet is about? I looked titled player I know and about half of the games played end up in flag. Many resignations must time related as well. Among weaker players it must be even more common. Use pre-moves is probably mandatory in bullet to have any chance .
Lag compensation on this site is very random. As user who owns "good connection" ie i can ping days after days manta.lichess.ovh with 47-48 ms response, but i often lose with time to laggers, waiting for any reasonable response. You can not just "premove" all moves hoping opponent didn't something very unsound on board. This is not chess anymore too. And those countless games lost - were that final checkmate didn't make it's way to server...
This is not question why? - why to play or how fast to play or what modification of chess you like - this is about feeling equality of conditions you play your games.
Time measurement should be righteous and also feel so. Currently it's biased more to slow connection owners and random connections and that at least feels unfair.
With lichess manner of lag compensation, i sometimes wonder - why bother to measure time at all -its so unfair. Several times i have thought, why i still play here (read addiction topics), but that chess.com have it's curtains and other nasty problems or areas they do not exactly deliver.
What counts to offer play x+n time games, on those games you can not then berserk, as you lose that +n part of time.
In brief, current lag compensation method sucks big-time, non 0 (0,1 sec or similar) move time in endgame - like last 10 secs or so time left on clock idea is actually quite good and it still allows use of berserk.
What i wonder, there are still players, who can play certain parts of game like script users - i mean their 2-3 moves in certain positions arrive at once like on move. That "feature" makes lichess one premove policy under question. Good example are those chess player like poor beings , who play bh6 like second move as white in game and hoping take g7 bish and h8 rook after. Their moves always appear instantly, like bot-play, but there are other positions occasions too.
This is not question why? - why to play or how fast to play or what modification of chess you like - this is about feeling equality of conditions you play your games.
Time measurement should be righteous and also feel so. Currently it's biased more to slow connection owners and random connections and that at least feels unfair.
With lichess manner of lag compensation, i sometimes wonder - why bother to measure time at all -its so unfair. Several times i have thought, why i still play here (read addiction topics), but that chess.com have it's curtains and other nasty problems or areas they do not exactly deliver.
What counts to offer play x+n time games, on those games you can not then berserk, as you lose that +n part of time.
In brief, current lag compensation method sucks big-time, non 0 (0,1 sec or similar) move time in endgame - like last 10 secs or so time left on clock idea is actually quite good and it still allows use of berserk.
What i wonder, there are still players, who can play certain parts of game like script users - i mean their 2-3 moves in certain positions arrive at once like on move. That "feature" makes lichess one premove policy under question. Good example are those chess player like poor beings , who play bh6 like second move as white in game and hoping take g7 bish and h8 rook after. Their moves always appear instantly, like bot-play, but there are other positions occasions too.
@petri999 said in #27:
> many think would make worse
Actually, they're not able to logically explain WHY this is a bad suggestion that's why this comes up again and again.
> large body of people could not care less
Even we couldn't care less about them. In fact, such people are rarely ever mentioned about in the forums.
I don't know if you realise this, but what you wrote in #31 supports this suggestion.
> many think would make worse
Actually, they're not able to logically explain WHY this is a bad suggestion that's why this comes up again and again.
> large body of people could not care less
Even we couldn't care less about them. In fact, such people are rarely ever mentioned about in the forums.
I don't know if you realise this, but what you wrote in #31 supports this suggestion.
@lakfish said in #33:
> Actually, they're not able to logically explain WHY this is a bad suggestion that's why this comes up again and again.
>
>
> Even we couldn't care less about them. In fact, such people are rarely ever mentioned about in the forums.
>
> I don't know if you realise this, but what you wrote in #31 supports this suggestion.
Well, people just got used to 0 second premoves. Changing it will annoy all bullet players.
> Actually, they're not able to logically explain WHY this is a bad suggestion that's why this comes up again and again.
>
>
> Even we couldn't care less about them. In fact, such people are rarely ever mentioned about in the forums.
>
> I don't know if you realise this, but what you wrote in #31 supports this suggestion.
Well, people just got used to 0 second premoves. Changing it will annoy all bullet players.
@StephenPS said in #34:
> Well, people just got used to 0 second premoves. Changing it will annoy all bullet players.
I don't think so, because that will be in effect for their opponents too, so no one will lose any more games than they already do. Instead of avoiding changes altogether, we must think how they could make lichess better.
> Well, people just got used to 0 second premoves. Changing it will annoy all bullet players.
I don't think so, because that will be in effect for their opponents too, so no one will lose any more games than they already do. Instead of avoiding changes altogether, we must think how they could make lichess better.
@lakfish said in #33:
> Actually, they're not able to logically explain WHY this is a bad suggestion that's why this comes up again and again.
>
Does it matter why they would not like it? None the arguments presented for it do not form logical explanation why should be different.
And it comes up again and again because player mass is big. Why there is at least one per week "how to map my rating to FIDE rating" a week. It is pretty nonsensical question but it will still come up. Big numbers just create lots of all sorts of stuff.
> Actually, they're not able to logically explain WHY this is a bad suggestion that's why this comes up again and again.
>
Does it matter why they would not like it? None the arguments presented for it do not form logical explanation why should be different.
And it comes up again and again because player mass is big. Why there is at least one per week "how to map my rating to FIDE rating" a week. It is pretty nonsensical question but it will still come up. Big numbers just create lots of all sorts of stuff.
@lakfish said in #35:
> I don't think so, because that will be in effect for their opponents too, so no one will lose any more games than they already do.
Lets say I play an ultrabullet game, with 60 moves.
20 are premoves, so 2 seconds are lost.
2 Seconds matter a lot when the time control is 15s.
> I don't think so, because that will be in effect for their opponents too, so no one will lose any more games than they already do.
Lets say I play an ultrabullet game, with 60 moves.
20 are premoves, so 2 seconds are lost.
2 Seconds matter a lot when the time control is 15s.
@petri999 said in #36:
> None the arguments presented for it do not form logical explanation why should be different.
Having the ability to make moves faster than the speed of light (by the clock) is truly magical and at the same time illogical at its best. What more explanation do you need?
> None the arguments presented for it do not form logical explanation why should be different.
Having the ability to make moves faster than the speed of light (by the clock) is truly magical and at the same time illogical at its best. What more explanation do you need?
@StephenPS said in #37:
> 2 Seconds matter a lot when the time control is 15s.
How does that tell that premoves should exist? Btw, if it was really logical, it'd have been a thing in otb, but unfortunately, it's not.
> 2 Seconds matter a lot when the time control is 15s.
How does that tell that premoves should exist? Btw, if it was really logical, it'd have been a thing in otb, but unfortunately, it's not.
@lakfish said in #39:
> Btw, if it was really logical, it'd have been a thing in otb, but unfortunately, it's not.
Well, you want ultrabullet in OTB? Or you want ultrabullet to be removed from lichess?
> Btw, if it was really logical, it'd have been a thing in otb, but unfortunately, it's not.
Well, you want ultrabullet in OTB? Or you want ultrabullet to be removed from lichess?
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.