I play a lot of online blitz, and frequently my opponent would offer a rematch after a game. Although I sometimes accept, I usually am more interested in analyzing the game to see if I can learn from my mistakes, so I usually decline.

Reading some of the comments posted on chess.com, it seems that some players take offence at this, even going so far as to block opponents who don't accept their rematch request.

Why do players think they are entitled to a rematch? Am I breaking some unwritten etiquette? If I keep declining these requests, will I find myself out of opponents?

  • 3
    "He who analyses blitz is stupid." – Rashid Nezhmetdinov. But don't worry, I do it too! – itub Aug 10 '17 at 17:10
  • Tbh people who find it rude need to realize not everyone spends their time playing endless games. They have to realize people have jobs and a life outside of playing. If they dont Respect the decline they need to find different players who have no life. Its okay, dont let them get you down. Do you and live that life! Decline repeated invites! Take that bus acrossed the world! Make it happen! Follow your dreams! You can do itttttty! I believe in you. – xEQUiiNOX2020 Aug 10 '17 at 17:35
  • 1
    The concept of revanche or giving a second chance to the loser. It has values. Anyway, it's their right to block anyone for any reason, isn't it? – Trilarion Aug 11 '17 at 9:09
  • This behavior isn't exclusive to chess - in MMOs and boardgames of several different types this can also be observed. – T. Sar Aug 11 '17 at 11:43

They may have made a fatal mistake and think that in another game they can win.

It happens sometimes. You could make a mistake, or miss a mating pattern, and suddenly you've lost the game although you thought you were in the lead. In this case, many people may ask for a rematch because they think that they should have won and want to redeem themselves. If you decline this request, they may see it as claiming a "cheap win".

They may also get offended by you declining their request because they might see it as "running away" from them, a more able player. This is almost insulting because they may see it as acknowledging that they "should have won", but running away with the victory regardless.

They could be Rating Farming.

If your opponent beat you by a large margin, they may ask for a rematch in order to secure a couple of easy wins against you, especially if you have a higher rating than them. Declining this rematch is denying that possible rating boost and could be taken the wrong way.

Both of the above reasons depict your opponents in a rather negative way, however I think that anyone who blocks another user on the basis that they won't accept a rematch request may not be the best sportsman. The thing is, if they are asking for a rematch because they like your playing style, or want to learn from you, they aren't going to block you if you decline, are they?

Perhaps it's me, perhaps not, but I think that anyone who blocks others for not accepting a rematch is either trying to get easy wins for rating or annoyed / in a bad mood about their own play.

Being frustrated about making mistakes, if allowed to affect your play, will lead to more mistakes and more frustration. Frustrated players make rash decisions and are more likely to take out their anger on their opponent.

I don't think you are breaking any unspoken code of online chess, I just think that some of the chess players out there lack a certain amount of maturity. Take them to a real tournament where you are face to face with your opponent and perhaps they'll learn some tips.

| improve this answer | |
  • 1
    Your answer is missing an "of" (in order to secure a couple [of] easy wins against you). I'd fix it but of is too short, the minimum edit being 6 characters. – user13963 Aug 10 '17 at 13:17
  • 2
    @ゼーロ my apologies – Aric Aug 10 '17 at 13:58
  • 2
    Reminds me of players in other online team games who are losing the game, but believe they are a better individual player than some player on the other team and demand for them to "1v1 me bro!". – Shufflepants Aug 10 '17 at 19:09
  • 3
    "I just think that s̶o̶m̶e̶ ̶o̶f̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶c̶h̶e̶s̶s̶ ̶p̶l̶a̶y̶e̶r̶s̶ ̶o̶u̶t̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶r̶e a lot of people on the internet lack a certain amount of maturity." – jpmc26 Aug 10 '17 at 21:45
  • @Shufflepants are you referring to League of Legends by any chance? ;) – John Bell Aug 11 '17 at 11:03

Concerning the last question, no, you will not run out of opponents.

I've been playing on chess.com for about seven years, and when I play blitz I'm almost exclusively interested in having a bit of fun. If you have ever had a small match of a few games against someone online, you quickly realize that many of the games resemble a lot since it is common to play the pet lines that you each enjoy. These repetitive games can quickly reach positions that you know the assessment of, taking away the fun and unpredictability of the game. Because of this, I rarely play the same opponent twice, never ask for a rematch and systematically decline all rematch offers. I don't know if I have been blocked by any players, but there is always someone on the other end of the board to play when I try to.

However, I must say that I may not be your typical online chess player. I rarely take the games as a depiction of my actual strength as a chess player, although I am extremely competitive and do not wish to lose any games. Because of this, most of the time any time scramble, flagging or piece hanging occurs, either on my side or my opponent's side, I take it as being a part of the game mode that I'm playing. It is not a personal offense or unsportsmanlike to use these "techniques" (although "tricks" is probably a more accurate description of what they are) to win a game, it's part of the fun being able to spot unorthodox winning combinations that rely on the position on the board as well as the amount of time there's left on the clock. Not everyone agrees with this viewpoint, and some may be offended if you beat them in an unorthodox way.

| improve this answer | |

To add something else to the other answers: I almost always offer a rematch and almost always accept a rematch but I sometimes need to run away to the toilet or to talk to someone at home or whatever else that needs attention. It is absurd to expect the readiness to accept any rematch.

| improve this answer | |
  • agreed. sometimes you have to go regardless. I usually explain in chat if there is one – Aric Aug 10 '17 at 15:25

Several mistakes here: 1: Chess.com - you are probably being trolled by 10-year old brats. Lots of children on that site. 2: Entitled to a rematch? No. If you don't want to play the opponent again, then simply decline. However, it is in a sense 'fair' to do a rematch to even out the color selections. In your mind, play games in "pairs" and be prepared to play 2 vs each opponent.

Besides, if your challenges are within 200 rating points of yourself, then the games should be competitive.

I'd examine why you want to stop and analyze a blitz game mid-stream of playing games. that is non-productive in my estimation. Since your games are recorded automatically, simply play a handful of games then revisit them. You will have a different perspective on the game when you get around to analyzing it post-mortem.

| improve this answer | |

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.