Add new comment

I'm not going to even pretend this is a deep post, nor am I seeking validation from y'all on my currently feeble chess skills.  But I've run into something during my 3,727 games played over on Chess.com, where my rating currently sits at a woefully inadequate 1324, and I had the glimmer of a thought that it *might* have some bearing on this MLB offseason, so here goes: at what point is playing the clock, rather than the board, uncouth or otherwise socially/morally/ethically deficient?  To broaden the question: is it possible for playing the clock to be in bad form, or is it always acceptable to leverage a 30-seconds-remaining-on-your-clock advantage at the end of the game, to stall--even sacrificing pieces to protect the king--in order to run your opponent out of time and thereby secure a W? (this question would be a great one to have Doc, the resident SSI chess expert, answer if he's inclined)

Obviously this question tells you, the discerning reader of SSI, quite a bit about my clock management skills (or, more acutely, my lack thereof!) since we generally only inquire into things that concern or irritate us.  I often find myself up by 4-6 points in the end game, with advantageous position and an obvious win, but only 20 seconds to close the deal while my opponent's still got a minute or so to burn (I play almost exclusively 3:00 games precisely because I'm working to tighten up my game in this regard).  I honestly don't think that poorly of my opponents when they turn their total attention to the clock...well, not usually ;-)  Hey, I'm only human!  But I do sometimes wonder how the world at large, and the chess-playing community in specific, views the strategy.

But it got me to thinking about all the free agents still sitting around without 2018 contracts.  And not just free agents, but most of the creme de la creme of this FA class is unemployed as of January 6/7 (depending where you live).  A bunch of quality relievers have flown off the board (mostly in the direction of the Rocky Mountains) and Carlos Santana signed, and I'm sure I'm forgetting some others but the Big Dawgs are still on the sidelines.

Are the owners no longer playing the board?  Are they now focused 100% on the clock, hoping they can wait out the free agents, sign them all to pillow contracts, and (essentially) cause a deflationary chain reaction starting with next year's free agent class?  I know everyone wants to take a crack at Bryce Harper and Manny Machado, so for the teams pursuing them they would want to keep as much powder dry as possible, but the amount of powder being conserved at this point is alarming from a variety of angles (and I say that as no friend to Labor, philosophically speaking, when it comes to collective bargaining disputes or other Union conflicts).

Losing a game to a 1420 ranked player recently, who had smartly used his clock more efficiently than I had--even though I was up a rook and had blown out his castle--made me wonder if that's what's happening to this free agent class.  They know when spring training starts, and they know how much money these players stand to lose by not signing contracts before then.  I honestly don't see anything wrong with ownership leveraging their pocketbooks like this, just as I (usually ;-) ) don't see anything wrong with my opponents making me pay for my often poor clock management skills, but I was wondering if the mainframe had any thoughts on the issue--or, for that matter, on whether or not I've completely missed the mark in my pattern-recongition-firmware-run-amok analogy.