The new trend on Lichess: "NO REMATCH"

@petri999 Yet, for some reason there is a chess world championship MATCH, not a world championship game. Why is that's the case? The world chess cup consists of several mini matches, why would they do that, if chess is all about a single game? Why Paul Morphy went to Europe and wasted so much time playing that many games against Andersen, in the 1800s?

@jupp53 Fortunately there are already a lot of players that love playing mini-matches too. Every once in a while we stumble upon each other :)

@etaLaskera exactly people agree before hand on a match while on Lichess we agree on a single game. And matches are rarity even on top level. And Morphy played andersen as players of that calibre are hard to come by. While lichess - just press new opponent and you get opponent quite worthy of you.

@Gyryth

There is no way to tell exactly what is motivating any particular player. However, as a general matter, I think I am correct. If you want to style your reticence to rematch as a matter of not feeding into the ego of a defeated opponent, that indicates to me that you view the game of chess, at least in part, as a means of obtaining a psychological/emotional reward. That's falls in line with my general theory. People generally do not like to rematch because they do not want to risk losing after winning (or, losing again).

"I'm not going to dignify these ego-seeking losers with another game" is another way of saying "I'm not going to risk my psychological well-being because I know there's a chance I will lose."

This is not necessarily a bad thing; it is human nature. Were it not for the clash of egos, and the desire to come out on top, chess would not be a game worth playing. My point is I find the alternative explanations tedious and, based on my personal experiences, not credible - especially when the overwhelming majority of players *immediately* move to another game, with another opponent, after either winning or losing (more often after winning). Where in that infinitesimal interval of time they can manage to cook dinner, use the bathroom, babysit their little sister, or analyze the game "in depth," is beyond me.

The only thing deeper than the raw psychological panic that causes people to run from a rematch is the ocean of excuses people concoct to avoid conceding the existence of their raw psychological panic.

@etaLaskera

I think Lichess should introduce an option whereby players can agree to play a match rather than simply being paired for one game, and one game only, as a default. It would be an interesting option. Whether it is two games, or a best of three, or a best of four, etc., would be up to the players to decide.

"5+2 Rated 4G" as an example.

@GSP0113

"On rare occasions, I'll accept a rematch request from someone I've just beaten and I often regret it. Why? Because often the person is angry, or appears to be angry, and brings out his Q on his second move in an attempt to revenge his defeat with a fast, overwhelming attack. I can repel the attack, of course, but it's tiresome."

So, you don't rematch because you are turned off by the prospect of a defeated player .... trying to win the rematch? The notion that you can detect "anger" by a player's move choice is also ... interesting ... to say the least. I think perhaps there is a bit of projection going on here . That is, you know that *you* get angry when losing, and you simply assume others must also get angry and, therefore, do not deserve a rematch if they previously lost.

@ #54: Actually, your suggestion about setting up a match instead of simply a game is spot on.

@Bukowskithebum You're pulling a mighty big rabbit out of an awful small hat there. I NEVER accept rematches and I put that in my profile. In that way I remove any psychological component from the equation. I just find it amusing that my challenges almost exclusively come from losers. The funniest of all are the ones that drag out an obvious losing position, making you play a routine solus rex checkmate right down to the last move, procrastinating on the clock as they do so - and then ask for a rematch!

If people want to make up fancy excuses to the detriment of other players for not having their needs gratified, then I would not deny them the consolation.

@Bukowskithebum You've never noticed that an angry player often plays differently than someone calm? And you've never encountered players who are obviously angered after you've beat them? Please.

Do me a favor and go play amateur psychiatrist with someone else.

Or, if you insist on pretending you're the next Sigmund Freud, fine; two can play.

Really: I'm sorry someone rejected your request for a rematch and it's caused you so much psychic damage that you now ascribe insulting motivations to every chess player who doesn't accept rematch requests. I can sense your pain and I know how much you're hurting.

Buck up, little bunny. Have a cup of tea, find your happy place, and get past this trauma you've experienced. We're all rooting for you.

* * *

(Also, please don't pad the bottom of your comments with multiple blank lines. It takes up screen space that other people have to scroll through. Thanks.)

@Gyryth

The entire fixation seems eminently psychological. It seems, based on your response, rooted in vengeance. But, in any event, you are entitled to your preferences - so, that's that.

@GSP0113

"Notice an angry player playing differently than someone calm" though a computer screen? No. Never. It seems like you are playing enough psychiatrist (or psychopath) on your own to warrant any further input on my end. Remind me never to play a game with you.

@Bukowskithebum Awwww. Not so fun when others play the amateur psychiatrist, is it? I'll file this one under "Dishes it out, but can't take it."