Feature Request: Don't change rating points when terminating abandoned match

Respectfully, the needed option would be to adjourn the game, not abort it.

#8 hits the nail on the head why FIDE rules don't include an option for aborting games. There is nothing unjust about claiming victory against a disconnected opponent, although many of us would prefer not to have a game end that way.

@Toadofsky said in #21:
> Respectfully, the needed option would be to adjourn the game, not abort it.
> [...]

That would be ideal but would create huge extra problems (and would also require significant new code to be developed and implemented to keep track of adjourned games and enable their resumption).

In the early days of online chess the ICC allowed games to be adjourned and would automatically adjourn them if a player disconnected. The consequence was large numbers of outstanding adjourned games, lots of bad feeling when both players were present but one of them refused to resume for whatever reason, and consequent extra work for human administrators to deal with those cases. Often the player refusing to resume had good reason not to, if they had logged in to do something else, not to play.

Another problem with adjournment is that the player on move suddenly has lots and lots of time to consider their move. There can be no "sealed move" in this situation as used to be done when OTB games would be adjourned.

Yeah, I'm not suggesting automatic adjournment, that's for sure.

The opponent will leave in a bad position and you will have to wait for his time to run out to get the elo

A player wins by forfeit and automatically scores one point (7.1)
handbook.fide.com/chapter/OnlineChessRegulations ̈
It's also applies OTB (Article 10: Points 10.1)
handbook.fide.com/chapter/E012023

Then we have default time, which is how long a player can be late to a game without being forfeited. (6.7)
This feature would be useful in the Lichess Swiss team.

A forfeit is an infringement to the Laws of chess (4.8.1 )
If both players are guilty of something, then it would be zero points for both of them. (11.8)
Forfeits are decided by the arbiters. So, the score should be given by Lichess and not by us picking what we want as result point when someone forfeits their game. (11.7)

The numbers in brackets are there as a reference ... the words might not be exact to the references.

Average Rating of Opponents (AROC) ... All forfeits and byes are to be cut from the calculation...
handbook.fide.com/chapter/TieBreakRegulationsPre2022
Maybe the forfeit games could have an analyse algorithm made-up to make the call of a win or a draw. Just like the given values for inaccuracies, mistakes and blunders. The game gets analysed when one player forfeits ... as long as it meets the minimum number of moves to be server analysed.

On lichess, is a forfeited game considered useless for tie-breaking purposes? If it is not counted, than the opponents chances of getting first prize may have dropped to 2nd place because a player forfeits the end games.

If a move was made, then a player that gets a winning point, should expect a rating change. How much depends on the Lichess arbiter. Maybe the rating change could be similar to a draw, but not lose points, because you did not forfeit the game. The opponent did. So the opponent should be getting the loss.

Next time don't press the draw button. The draw button is a bug that should not be there when a player forfeits a game.

Sometimes a draw with similar ratings gives...
(1689) ±0
(1673) ±0
I was wrong ... The player that forfeits should not drop in ratings. Because even with 2 players that forfeit neither drop in rating.(11.8)
So it makes no logical sense to drop in rating, if you accept a draw instead of a full point in a forfeited game.
A forfeited rating change should never be below ±0.
So, you should not have been dinged lower than that because you selected a draw instead of a win. You are not the one that forfeited the game. @Clarkey

@Toscani said in #25:
> Maybe the forfeit games could have an analyse algorithm made-up to make the call of a win or a draw.

In fact, why even bother playing chess at all when algorithms can tell us who should have won? Perhaps we shouldn't invent new unprecedented rules on a whim just because we feel it's fair to do so...

I edited post #26

Good idea, once implemented I will disconnect from any games that I am losing in, and so then I will never lose a rating point again

@Toadofsky said in #21:
> Respectfully, the needed option would be to adjourn the game, not abort it.
>
> #8 hits the nail on the head why FIDE rules don't include an option for aborting games. There is nothing unjust about claiming victory against a disconnected opponent, although many of us would prefer not to have a game end that way.
No, adjourning would indeed be the worst idea in this matter.
And yes, I agree there is nothing unjust in claiming victory. I would never blame anybody for doing so. But sometimes I just do not WANT it.
There is also nothing unjust in asking for a takeback. I just never want it.