Thanks, Martin. I've been on both sides of this as a winner and a looser. I try to play within the clock, but it does not always go that way, and it seems to be an area where some people can take advantage.
Running out of time in Blitz.
Sort:
Time is a big part of chess. Even if you’re up on material, running out of time means your opponent had better time management.
I like the philosophy of "in fast time controls, the clock is an extra piece", so I'll be using full advantage of the clock if opponent is low on time, just like I'm totally fine if I have a completely winning position but lose on time anyway.
May 15, 2021
0
#6
prototype1700 wrote:
I like the philosophy of "in fast time controls, the clock is an extra piece", so I'll be using full advantage of the clock if opponent is low on time, just like I'm totally fine if I have a completely winning position but lose on time anyway.
Yeah same except I still hate losing soooo 
I know there are going to be mixed opinions about this, but I want to hear the general feelings. Here is the situation. A player is clearly ahead in Blitz, but he is about to run out of time----thus loose the game. Is it the "right" thing for the lesser player to resign (good manners, and all of that)??? But, if the winning player wants to win and excel at the game, he should plan to not run out of time. After all, it is called Blitz. How do we feel about that. I'll bet there are strong opinions on both sides.
No, in blitz, if someone uses more time to get get a better position, it is up to them to make sure they reserve enough time to finish the game. Personally, I'll resign in most cases, unless they opponent is really low on time and I have enough material to have some chances, no matter how slim.