I'll never understand this stuff...

I usually enjoy playing chess at the Free Internet Chess Server (FICS) and I especially appreciate having access to their massive database of games played on the site – but my experiences with opponents who disconnect when losing can be terribly frustrating.

I thought that I understood the rules that govern adjudication of disconnections, after my most recent encounter (see "Serves me right...").

So, when I played the following game I realized right away that just because my opponent made a mess of things and then he disconnected, it didn't mean that he would be penalized for it...

The outcome of an adjudication is primarily based on position and clocks. Who disconnected is rarely a decisive factor.

perrypawnpusher - anonymous

blitz, FICS, 2010

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Bc5 5.Bxf7+ Kxf7 6.Nxe5+ Nxe5 7.d4 Nxe4 8.Nxe4 Bb6 9.dxe5

Position? White is up a pawn, has a safer King, and is ready to castle. (Fritz 8 rates White about a pawn and a half better.)

Clocks? I had more time than my opponent, but time was not critical.

Result of adjudication? The game was aborted.

I could guess that maybe the game hadn't been long enough to be adjudicated a win (see "Disconnect" where a 14-move game was aborted by adjudication), if it were not for the fact that I'd had a opponent disconnect against me after 7 moves, request adjudication, and be awarded a win... (see "A Sneaky Way to Beat the Jerome Gambit...")

It seems that the "d/r/a Defense" remains one of the strongest ways to counter the Jerome and its relatives. Pity.