Aborting before starting not counted as a win. Arguments in favour of this are illogical.

I discussed this topic awhile ago. My view is that when players abort without starting a game it should be counted as a win for the other player. IMO that would stop a lot of nonsense when people avoid openings they don't like which I think is a subtle form of cheating.

A number of people argued that rating points are an indication of ability, and so rating points should not be awarded if the game is not started.

However, I think that argument is flawed and silly. Rating points are awarded, for instance if the other player loses connection, even if only a couple of moves have been played. And, if a player aborts after only several moves, that is really no more indication of ability than if the game was never played.

Therefore, it seems inconsistent to be awarding rating points in one circumstance (only several moves) that has no indication of ability but not in another circumstance where the game ends prematurely (no moves).

I have seen players playing rapid make an open challenge and then spend a short while looking at the opponents' stats. If the opponent has a far higher rapid rating than blitz they abort, with the assumption the opponent may cheat at rapid to achieve such a rating. It can also depend if they have a new account.

The players I have observed doing this are rated over 2400.

@cashcow8 said in #2:
> have seen players playing rapid make an open challenge and then spend a short while looking at the opponents' stats. If the opponent has a far higher rapid rating than blitz they abort, with the assumption the opponent may cheat at rapid to achieve such a rating.

I started a topic on this awhile back as well. The general consensus was that many players find blitz harder than rapid. I certainly am like that. My rapid rating is around 1800. My blitz is around 1500. The reason I suck at blitz isn't due to cheating. But just that I am older (65) and find the blitz a bit too fast for my aging brain. The consensus was that a lot of people tend to be better at one format than the other. So, I don't think that is a legitimate excuse for aborting.

Well that doesn't take into account when you click on a game from the lobby and the game changed to a different game under your finger to a game you didn't want. I wouldn't want to lose rating points for a misclick
Arena tournaments give you points if player doesn't make a move, and we all love free points ,I think this should also work for Swiss tournaments where a player has left but not withdrawn and leaves you sitting there for half an hour , staring at the board , so in some cases I agree but a simple misclick from the lobby I disagree.

@SimonBirch said in #4:
> I wouldn't want to lose rating points for a misclick

But we lose rating points if there is a disconnection, even if it is a fault with the Lichess server. So, I don't really see it any different to that.

In the end it would all even out. But, what pisses me off is people who abort when they get an opening they don't like. IMO that is cheating plain and simple. I tend to get that a lot if I open say with Nf3 or b3. If people abort because they are trying to skew their ratings by only playing openings they like then that is just as bad.

@TonyNorriss said in #1:
> A number of people argued that rating points are an indication of ability, and so rating points should not be awarded... Rating points are awarded, for instance...
You are manifesting exactly the misunderstanding this is all about. Rating is *not* supposed to be seen as an _award_ (or punishment). It's a technical tool, not a reward system. Even in a (swiss) tournament, if your opponent does not show, you get a point to the results but the ratings are not updated. And it's exactly like that in OTB world, by the way: e.g. the FIDE regulations explicitely state that only games where each player played at least one move can be counted into rating calculation.

Unfortunately you are not alone, too many people see rating as a reward system and reaching rating milestones as their primary goal - and some chess sites actually support this way of thinking. Interesting reading related to this problem: lichess.org/@/SayChessClassical/blog/are-online-chess-players-trapped-pigeons/JPMnLrTC

@TonyNorriss said in #5:
> But we lose rating points if there is a disconnection, even if it is a fault with the Lichess server. So, I don't really see it any different to that.
>
> In the end it would all even out. But, what pisses me off is people who abort when they get an opening they don't like. IMO that is cheating plain and simple. I tend to get that a lot if I open say with Nf3 or b3. If people abort because they are trying to skew their ratings by only playing openings they like then that is just as bad.

Hmm I see your point,I only really open with e4 so haven't experienced it but see how it must be annoying . Is there a solution to this problem, or something that you have to accept as an online chess experience. Maybe just laugh when you scare them off with your different openings ,like don't sweat the small stuff or what other people are doing for ratings. Enjoy 'your ' chess for yourself , peace up SimonBirch

@SimonBirch said in #4:
> Well that doesn't take into account when you click on a game from the lobby and the game changed to a different game under your finger to a game you didn't want. I wouldn't want to lose rating points for a misclick
> Arena tournaments give you points if player doesn't make a move, and we all love free points ,I think this should also work for Swiss tournaments where a player has left but not withdrawn and leaves you sitting there for half an hour , staring at the board , so in some cases I agree but a simple misclick from the lobby I disagree.

I think that has happened to me, and I think they could introduce a 'confirm' feature when you do that whereby you confirm if you really meant to join that game. If you did not, it goes back to the lobby. They will give you a few seconds to confirm in which nobody else can take that challenge.

People abort for all sorts of reasons and regardless of the reason if they haven’t moved they shouldn’t lose ratings. If they are chronic aborters they will get warned and banned so I don’t really see the problem

@TonyNorriss said in #3:
> I started a topic on this awhile back as well. The general consensus was that many players find blitz harder than rapid. I certainly am like that. My rapid rating is around 1800. My blitz is around 1500. The reason I suck at blitz isn't due to cheating. But just that I am older (65) and find the blitz a bit too fast for my aging brain. The consensus was that a lot of people tend to be better at one format than the other. So, I don't think that is a legitimate excuse for aborting.

I far prefer rapid to blitz, and I totally hate no increment, and after getting "dirty flagged" at 10+0 whilst comfortably beating a 2400+ rated player on the board but simply couldn't move at lightning speed, I have decided to totally retire from no-increment regardless of how much time starts on the clock.

However when I have played blitz e.g. 3+2, whilst my rating is lower than that of rapid, I have taken a few scalps at higher rating.
I think it's a bit unfair that my win against a 2400+ rated bullet player didn't add anything to my blitz rating because for whatever reason they'd only played bullet before. I think they berserked against me but I won by checkmate not flagging.