SWITCH SIDES

Before I pen this topic, I have the feeling that most of you would not want this topic to be raised again. My apologies, as I felt that "silence is not golden " as it effects   chess enthusiasts who participate on "live chess". To achieve harmony and clarity of purpose, a pianist must stroke the Black and White keys on his keyboard. Since last November till to-date, I have played about 1,900  games on 'live chess'.

With the introduction of the new format of " cannot choose colors", on live chess, I would like to offer my feedback and some suggestions for the management to implement.

More often than not, the system did not rotate the colors of play properly. At times, I  experienced playing Black on 3 continuous occasions, and also sometimes alloted White the same number of times.It is also very frustrating when you request for a rematch, it is not given. Why is this so common?? Because if your opponent agrees to a rematch, he has to play Black. But, if he loses, he will demand for a rematch.To be alloted White, player  has the advantage of making the first move, and seize the initiative.  From encounters over live chess, most players treasure their rating. To see their rating go up, definitely boost their morale and ego.To be fair to the player, may I suggest the following:-

1) Allot Black to the lower rated player who will strive to beat his higher rated opponent to increase his own rating

2) When both players have the same rating or almost, ensure that both will have a turn on Black as well as on White

3) If a player has only time for one game only,he has to stipulate his intention. Example:- Have time for only one game / Have time for any number of games.

4) At the conclusion of every game, 'switch sides'; so that everyone has a fair rotation of playing both Black and White. This is practised at POGO. com

Thank you all for taking time to read this . I hope Staff of Chess.com. can do some changes to improve the system.

When you have had the same color for the third time in a row, did you check what colors your opponent had in his previous games? If you both have black two games in a row and then play each other, one of you has to have black for a third game in a row. There is just no way around this.

No one owes you a rematch, ever. Maybe you think it's the nice thing to do, but what if they get a phone call, or just decide they don't like playing right now? In an over-the-board tournament you get one game against your opponent, why do you think it's only possible to be fair online with multiple games?

Giving the lower rated player black sounds like a double punishment. Also, it goes against the idea of equalizing the number of whites and blacks each player gets.

Well, I guess if you have played 1900 games and are a premium member, you do deserve a chance to air your concerns. That being said, when playing in a club game, the general rule of etiquette is to give the better player the White pieces. However, this is an unrated game. I don't think it would work for rated games. Also, how much of a ratings difference are we talking about? A 1400 challenging an 1800, okay, you want to give the 1800 White. But what about a 1400 challenging a 1500, or even a 1450?

Also, it is not necessary to have a rematch. Yes, you gain some amount of an advantage with White usually. But in a tournament setting, one game is enough to decide who is the better player is. You don't need to switch sides there. The better player will win . . . "it just takes a little longer with Black".

When you send out a seek, it is understood that it is only for one game. Perhaps you should just put a name on your game like, "Seeking Best 2/3" or whatever you're looking for at the time.

This has not been the case in any club I've participated in.

When I challenge the best player at a club, I like to offer them the White pieces. I guess if it's a casual game then whatever. I think it's the younger generation that loves to do the pawn game.

If I was challenging one of the Chess.com Masters to a game in a club, I would let them decide how to choose colors rather than just grab the White pieces or assume they want to decide randomly.

The oldest guy (mid sixties) at one of the recent clubs I played at always choose colors randomly by "doing the pawn game" -- I assume that means one of each color pawn split between your hands, opponent guesses a hand. He was also one of the highest rated players in the club.

That's great. I'm just saying that when in doubt, I would offer the senior player or higher-rated player the option to have White or the decision in regards to how to determine colors for the game rather than make the choice for him or her.

That's great. I wasn't responding to that. That's your personal choice to give that deference to another player.

But frankly, you weren't just saying that. You also saied that you think it is younger people who prefer to select random colors using the pawn in hand game. I thought it was pretty clear that that was the part of your post I was responding to. I was just giving my personal experience as it relates to your speculation on that.

Wonderful.

To:- Loomis, thank you for your feedback. I would like to answer your queries to the best of my ability.

How am I going to check what colors my opponent had in previous games, when I had Black 3 games continously with 3 different opponents playing White. After the 1st game, You would not know that you are getting Black again. You  presume that it is turn to have White. Then again it did not happen after the 2nd game, you still get to play Black for the 3rd time.

I do not agree that allotment of Black to a lower rated player  against a higher rated player, is considered a "punishment", but in your words amounted  to " double punishment". I viewed it as a challenge and also as an incentive to increase my points rating. For example, a few days ago, My rating was 1380, and I was given Black against an opponent with a 1701 rating.I knew that if I win I would get more than 10 points, and if I lose, a mere deduction of about 3 points.I managed to beat him, and I got another 14 points added,  whilst he had 14 points deducted.

I agree that no one owes me a rematch, the same as the world do not owe me a living, and I do not owe the world a living. What I forgot to stress was that chess etiquette require an answer to " decline or accept ".There was no reply.

I do not mean that you should check what color your opponent had in previous games before you play them. I mean that you should check after.

Why do you presume that after you have a game with the black pieces it is your turn to have the whtie pieces? What if your next opponent also had the black pieces in their last game? Then you can't both presume to play white!

To:- ModernCalvin, my sincere appreciation for your support and feedback.

I am still waiting for the input / rebuttals from Staff of Chess.com. Have a nice day !!!