If you win + give a Rematch = fair attitude

hello i agree the winning player should always give a rematch it is very kind to do so

There is a simple solution that lichess could implement: make it possible to offer 1 or 2 game challenges (and in case of a 2 game challenge, colours will be reversed for the 2nd game). If you want a rematch, offer a 2 game challenge right up front. If a player accepts it, then they are obliged to play the second game or forfeit it. With this feature, the rematch button should be removed.

@kajalmaya said in #42:

There is a simple solution that lichess could implement: make it possible to offer 2 game challenges .

Indeed. Thus those who want rematches would be satisfied and this cloying pretension to force the opponent to continue playing against him even if he doesn't want to would cease to exist. Everyone happy.

I don't think it's that easy or simple. That would split the playing pool and slow down the pairing process.

And complicate things. How do you force someone to play the follow-up games? You might penalize them in various ways, of course. Then we'd have a whole new category of recurring feedback complaints when that doesn't play out as expected.

@kajalmaya said in #42:

There is a simple solution that lichess could implement: make it possible to offer 1 or 2 game challenges (and in case of a 2 game challenge, colours will be reversed for the 2nd game). If you want a rematch, offer a 2 game challenge right up front. If a player accepts it, then they are obliged to play the second game or forfeit it. With this feature, the rematch button should be removed.

What a terrible suggestion.

Now I would need to agree on a rematch even before knowing my opponent. Chances are, my opponent is one of those jerks playing stupid but fast random moves, completely wasting my time. I would never want to agree to a multi-game match with unknown players upfront. And how would you punish not playing? Surely not by rating decrease, as this messes up with the rating system.

And then removing the rematch altogether - I think you never decide during the game or shortly after that the opponent was actually quite nice and you would like to to play them again? Or have a longer streak than one single rematch?

So basically removing the sensible and useful option in favour of a an unusable one.

A few weeks before meeting lichess I visited some others chess sites, and on one of these there was a "Match" option: best of 2 out of 3 games, or 3 out of 5. And this mode was practiced by many. It doesn't seem absurd to me, for those who like it.

@a_Tauri said in #46:

A few weeks before meeting lichess I visited some others chess sites, and on one of these there was a "Match" option: best of 2 out of 3 games, or 3 out of 5. And this mode was practiced by many. It doesn't seem absurd to me, for those who like it.

I think it could be a nice addition for individual challenges. Although, hitting the rematch button after each game seems to have no downside. In fact, you would want each player to signal they're ready for the next game by a click of a button anyway.

So it seems to have no real additional benefit, while at the same time complicating things (how to show data, how to proceed if someone bails out, etc.)

@nadjarostowa said in #47:

hitting the rematch button after each game seems to have no downside. In fact, you would want each player to signal they're ready for the next game by a click of a button anyway.

In that type of challange ("Match") both players agreed from the start to play 3 matches in a row ( 2, if one wins both ). I couldn't say if it created the complications you're talking about. I just remember that it was very practiced.

In "normal" games, obviously, the possibility of requesting a rematch must always be maintained. As we said, it is up to the other player to accept or not, freely.

I prefer not to do rematches, whether I win or lose. I prefer to analyze immediately after each game. In the past (on ICC), I would accept rematches if I won, but there are a lot of cases where it got silly. If the opponent wins the second game, are you obligated to play again to break the tie? If they lose again, do you play again for 3 out of 5? In some cases, it felt like people were trying to work out their openings by playing against me with slight variations until they finally got a playable middle game, or they were just trying to wear me out until I lost. That was less fun for me. I prefer egoless Zen Mode chess. I play and enjoy one game at a time.

@fdxvcxvcdzqwcxxzc said in #41:

hello i agree the winning player should always give a rematch it is very kind to do so

This is only your oppinion. What if the winning Player has nö time or just wanted to play only one game? And if He wins the second, is it also very kind to Do am third game and so on? Accept other oppinion. Simple as that.