Chess Clock Ethics

So I played a couple of blitz games today. I lost both games on time. However, in both cases, my opponent was in a hopelessly lost position. Had the games been rapid or classical time controls, I would have easily won. For reference, I am including both games in this post so you can see for yourself what I’m talking about.

These games raise the question — Is it ethical to play on, making fast random moves for the sole purpose of forcing your opponent to run out of time when you are in a clearly lost position?

I am aware of the arguments, probably the strongest of which is that the clock is part of the game from the beginning, and if the player who is winning cannot complete the win within the time allotted, then that player rightfully loses. However, there is also the other player to consider: The player with the losing position KNOWS she is in a lost position. Is there not also an ethical responsibility to recognize that fact and resign?

These two games have taught me that I should not play such fast time controls as blitz or bullet where losing on time is a real possibility. I also believe that I should practice what I’m preaching and make sure I resign in situations where I know I am lost, rather than move quickly to try to win solely on time. If I can break my habit of playing blitz and stick to rapid and classical time controls, then I shouldn’t have as many problems with the clock one way or the other.

One thought on “Chess Clock Ethics

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s