In this post we examine deliberate losing on time, and its lesser cousin deliberate timewasting, in the world of correspondence chess.

The rules of the International Correspondence Chess Federation provide for a range of time controls. The one that I have used most often requires you to make 10 moves in 50 days. After 10 moves, a further 50 days is added to your clock, and the same at later stages of the game. As with OTB chess, total time is what counts, so you do not have to make 10 moves in each period of 50 days counted separately. If you make 19 moves in the first 50 days, you only have to make 1 move in the next 50 days.

Players may take up to 45 days of leave in a calendar year. During a period leave, the clock is stopped and neither you nor your opponent can make a move.

There are penalties for slow play and running out of time. If you don’t make a move for 20 days, your remaining time is used up at double speed so that each additional day of consideration counts as two days off your clock. This process is known as duplication.

The system also sends reminders. First after 14 days of inactivity, just to prompt you. Second after 35 calendar days (i.e. ignoring duplication). At this point you must, within the next 5 calendar days, either make a move, or indicate your intention to carry on playing.

You lose the game if you run out of time, or you ignore the 35-day warning and do nothing by 40 days. Losing on time carries additional penalties in that you may be barred from competing in future events.

The allocation of 50 days for 10 moves is generous. No matter how busy you are, you don’t need that much time for so few moves. And in most of my correspondence games, my opponents have got on with the game more of less expeditiously.

Unfortunately, some players tend to slow the game down when they realise they are losing. Either they want to postpone the moment of defeat as long as possible. Or they simply lose interest in the game – in some cases letting the clock run down to zero. This makes the game seem interminable. One possible reform would be to introduce duplication at an earlier stage, after say 15 days or even 10 days, to speed the process of retribution for players who behave like this.

Now for some examples of completed games in 2022. I make no apology for naming and shaming.

Game 1
Start: 15 Apr 2022, End: 20 Oct 2022 (188 days)
White: Rodney Barking (ENG – 1800), Black: Johann Wiesinger (AUT – 1788).
A36: English, Symmetrical, Modern Botvinnik System
1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 g6 3.g3 Bg7 4.Bg2 O-O 5.e4 d6 6.Nge2 c5 7.O-O Nc6 8.d3 a6 9.h3 Rb8 10.a4 Ne8 11.Be3 Nc7 12.d4 cxd4 13.Nxd4 Ne6 14.Nde2

All this is theory, and is the line recommended for White by Simon Williams and Richard Palliser in ‘The Iron English’ (Everyman, 2020). Black normally continues with …Nc5 and …Nb4, and queenside play. My opponent pursued an independent path. It’s now 25 April – we have reached move 14 after only 10 days’ play.
14…b6 15.Rb1 a5 16.b3 Nc5 17.Rb2 Re8 18.Rd2
Black’s structure is quite rigid, with no obvious pawn breaks. In contrast White is well-placed to start a kingside attack. The computer evaluation is about +1.2, indicating a clear advantage to White.
18…Rb7 19.Nb5 Bd7 20.Nec3 Qc8 21.Kh2 Nb4 22.f4 Rb8 23.g4 Bc6 24.h4 Ra8 25.g5 Rd8 26.h5 Rf8 27.h6 Bxc3 28.Nxc3

White’s kingside attack has reached a dangerous point. The computer thinks White is winning (+2.8). My opponent should bring his pieces back to the kingside to defend. Instead he blunders a piece. After this the game becomes trivial. It’s now 9 May – we have made 28 moves in 24 days. Still quite a brisk rate of play.
28…Nxe4?? 29.Nxe4
My opponent realises that he is losing and starts to take longer over his moves.
29…Qb7 30.Qa1 f6 31.Qd4 Rae8 32.f5 gxf5 33.gxf6 e5 34.Qxd6 fxe4 35.f7+ Rxf7 36.Bh3 Qe7 37.Rg2+
Now the computer says that White can force mate in at most 7 moves. I could have sent my opponent a message to announce this, but the practice is passé. It’s now 4 June. The last 9 moves have taken 26 days, almost all used by Black.
37…Kh8
28 June – that’s +24 days.
38.Qxe7 Rexe7
17 July – that’s +19 days.
39.Be6 Be8
17 August – that’s +31 days.
40.Rfg1 Rg7
29 September – notionally +43 days, although I think most of this was annual leave taken by my opponent.
41.Rxg7 1–0
And now it’s mate in 2 moves. At this point Black resigned. 20 October – that’s +22 days.

From the start to White’s 37th move took 50 days. The remaining 5 moves took 138 days, over 4 months, although this did include a period of leave. Very unsporting behaviour by Herr Wiesinger. Normally after the game one exchanges pleasantries, e.g. “Good game – well played – thanks for the game,” but after this game I had nothing to say to my opponent.

Game 2
Start: 20 June 2022, End: 23 October 2022 (125 days)
White: Rodney Barking (ENG – 1800), Black: Thomas Clarke (SCO – 1800)
B06: Pirc–Robatsch, 4.Be3 Nf6
This was one game in a double-header on board 42 of the “friendly” match between Edinburgh and London. As the ICCF blurb puts it:
“The Edinburgh Chess Club is the oldest chess club in Scotland, established in 1822 and one of the oldest chess clubs in the world. As part of the Club’s bicentenary celebrations this match against London is being played as a sequel to their original match with London which started in 1824.”
Sadly unrated, but could resist such a romantic playing opportunity?
1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.Nc3 d6 4.Be3
The English Attack is White’s most popular continuation against the Pirc / Modern, even at GM level, giving the lie to its reputation as the hacker’s weapon of choice (“the 150 Attack,” beloved of players graded 150, or about 1825 these days). The idea is very simple: play Bh6, advance the h-pawn, deliver checkmate.
4…Nf6 5.Qd2 a6 6.Nf3 O-O 7.Bh6 c5 8.Bxg7 Kxg7 9.O-O-O Nc6 10.dxc5 dxc5 11.Qf4
Naturally White keeps the queens on the board, to strengthen the kingside attack.
11…Qa5 12.e5 Ng4 13.Bc4 Bf5 14.Rhe1 b5 15.Bd5 b4 16.Ne4 Rad8
Now both sides are attacking on opposite wings in an exciting middlegame position. However, White’s threats are stronger.
17.Ng3 Be6?!
Sacrificing a piece to break through on the queenside – but it’s not sound. White can take the material and defend successfully.
18.Bxe6 fxe6 19.Qxg4 Qxa2
Threatening mate in one, so White’s next few moves are forced.
20.Rxd8 Rxd8 21.Nd2 a5 22.Qe4 1-0

And that’s where the game stopped, with victory to White in an unclear position. What just happened?

Although the game started on 20 June, Black arrived late at the board and did not make his first move until 5 July. Play then progressed rapidly until after White’s 13th move on 8 July, just three days later. Black then slowed down and took 18 days over his next four moves.

After 17.Ng3, Black’s kingside pieces get into a tangle. He did not move again until 8 August, 13 days later, and followed up quickly with two more moves. I played 19.Nxg4 on 10 August. Inexplicably Black then took over a month to play 19…Qxa2, which is the only move in the position. He then played another two moves very quickly.

So to the final move in the game, 22.Qe4, which I played on 14 September. After that, nothing. I waited 39 calendar days, which with duplication amounted to 58 total days, and that point Black’s time ran out and he lost. I do not understand why he allowed this to happen. Maybe he thought there was no point continuing the game a piece down, even with compensation. As it happens the computer thinks Black can keep going with 22…Rd3, which keeps the white queen out of the queenside.

So this wasn’t unsporting, just very odd. I don’t see the point of starting a game of chess if you’re not going to see it through to the end. As Magnus Magnusson used to say on Mastermind: “I’ve started so I’ll finish,” his catchphrase whenever time ran out while he was reading a question on the show.