I would imagine [though cannot confirm without response] that I am not the only one who often suffers with seeking a long game, and finding multiple opponents, daily or weekly, who make a mockery of the game by blitz jockeying their moves even in endgames, or positions which cannot be magicked to solution.
It makes me feel ill and I am sure many peoples' games have been ruined by thoughtless blunders akin to sandbagging in this manner. Serious players should never be forced to suffer blitzers gatecrashing their games in the same way that a slow player would not willingly tank at blitz by repeatedly squandering time. If we wanted blitz, would not we seek blitz?
One cannot control the player who quits when you start thinking, or unduly pressures you to move. I do feel there could be implementable some sort of control for this.
It would be most helpful if the player who makes a seek has the option or information to see whether an incoming opponent is primarily [or wholly] a blitz player - that is, add a step before a game begins, to manually accept, and display something about the number or proportion of that player's games which are of a serious time control [no, I don't mean 8+0 or higher]. It might also help if one could see when the challenger has a large discrepancy between blitz and classical ratings - I have lately had several games with players whose classical ratings have inexplicably been several hundred points higher without attendant quality of play, and it tends to be a red flag.
Under the 'x seconds to start' system the site has to use to protect from the aborter fetish, the thinker has no real chance to protect himself from the blitzer who starts a game unknown. Once a game is started, resignation is out of the question, and repeated aborting will render the thinker labelled the rogue. The seek architecture is thus suboptimal for both groups.
Lest someone suggests joining slow groups, the groups I have joined are currently seemingly inactive, but that doesn't really address the point. There must be another way.
It makes me feel ill and I am sure many peoples' games have been ruined by thoughtless blunders akin to sandbagging in this manner. Serious players should never be forced to suffer blitzers gatecrashing their games in the same way that a slow player would not willingly tank at blitz by repeatedly squandering time. If we wanted blitz, would not we seek blitz?
One cannot control the player who quits when you start thinking, or unduly pressures you to move. I do feel there could be implementable some sort of control for this.
It would be most helpful if the player who makes a seek has the option or information to see whether an incoming opponent is primarily [or wholly] a blitz player - that is, add a step before a game begins, to manually accept, and display something about the number or proportion of that player's games which are of a serious time control [no, I don't mean 8+0 or higher]. It might also help if one could see when the challenger has a large discrepancy between blitz and classical ratings - I have lately had several games with players whose classical ratings have inexplicably been several hundred points higher without attendant quality of play, and it tends to be a red flag.
Under the 'x seconds to start' system the site has to use to protect from the aborter fetish, the thinker has no real chance to protect himself from the blitzer who starts a game unknown. Once a game is started, resignation is out of the question, and repeated aborting will render the thinker labelled the rogue. The seek architecture is thus suboptimal for both groups.
Lest someone suggests joining slow groups, the groups I have joined are currently seemingly inactive, but that doesn't really address the point. There must be another way.