Alex Weldon: A "time tesuji" is a kikashi used to avoid spending a byo-yomi period. A time-stealing tesuji, on the other hand, is a move with a complicated continuation, requiring the opponent to spend extra time thinking. The former is played when you are short of time, while the latter is played when the opponent is short of time. They should not be treated as synonymous.
Zarlan: So basicly, your saying that the first meaning should be kept here and the second one in time-stealing tesuji (which, at the moment, is basicly like a carbon copy of this page, sans some comments)
George Caplan: Actually, a move that causes your opponent to lapse into deep thought is useful both when he is in time trouble, or when you are in time trouble because you can think on his time.
While we are organizing clock management ideas, I have a couple of others.
If your opponent is in time trouble, slowing down will not help. On the other hand, keeping him in a rhythym of playing fast is not good either, mix your speed up a little, if you have time to do so.
Also, obvious and good moves are not going to make him use time. Sometimes bad moves, that he can not help but spend time thinking about punishing are just the trick.
I am not speaking to the morality of such tactics. They certainly have little to do with improving your go, they are merely about winning. Obviously, if you are ahead on time and ahead on the board, take you time and simply win. But if an opponent builds a lead by taking too much time, I do not believe it is innappropriate to attempt to punish him with time pressure.
ilan: Actually, you can also rattle your opponent by putting yourself in time pressure, the idea being that he might start playing more quickly himself in a belief that this will upset you, and he will end up making mistakes. I have actually used this strategy successfully (and yes, I only care about winning).
During lightning games the time-(stealing)-tesuji is more the funny description of the effect which a certain (otherwise normal) move might have. It was not meant - and usually it is not possible - to plan a move as such.tderz
Krit: In a tournament game, if you reach late endgame and it is quite clear that you have lost a big fight but your opponent's time is running out. Would you resign or keep playing to win by time? This dilemma happened to me once and I chose to resign because I wouldn't feel that it was my game although it is unfair that he had used more time to think in the complicated fights. One can argue that I could use his time to think too, but let's face it, in a low-level amatuer game you won't know what to expect from your opponent.
George Caplan Krit, your question is a bit hard to answer. If you have just lost a big fight, then you cannot be in the late endgame - unless it is one of those ko-fights where the threats eat up all of the useful moves. Normally in a tournament, there will be some sort of overtime, and if the game is clearly lost, then your choice of resignation is appropriate. However, in a tournament, you are entitled to make him prove he wins. And if you feel there is a chance you can pull off the upset, you are entitled to use your time to try to do it - after all, he used his time to get ahead. Ultimately, the only measure of fairness and deserving to win is what happens on the board.
nospoons Krit, you did the right thing, playing on for time or in the hopes of a mistake from an opponent is dishonorable and simply not in the spirit of the game. A loss is a loss, no big deal at all - I should know; I lose all the time :)
VanMorrison?: Regarding 'There are perennial and unresolved arguments about the ethics of such tactics and how tournaments should address them.' - What exactly is wrong with commencing a complex line when the opponent is short of time? If my opponent is in overtime, that is his own fault. If I have a choice of moves to make, I may consider that now is the time to try a probe, rather than make some other boring sequence which will require little thought to answer. A time stealing tesuji, by its very name, seems to suggest a cunning move that has at least a degree of validity or a degree of difficulty as to its refutation. It is not a 'idiotic invasion' nor a 'force my opponent to waste time taking stones from the board' move. I think that the comment about ethics here is misplaced.
Patrick Traill: Given your views, I am surprised you amended Loss on Time to call wasting time in a lost game ‘ungentlemanly’ rather than the more detached ‘annoying to very many players’, though admittedly ‘wasting’ in the title of the latter page does beg the question.
VanMorrison?: I think there is a distinction. If your game is basically lost and you are simply trying to win by placing stones on the board, this is basically regarded as bad manners in just about every culture I have encountered. A time-stealing tesuji, which to me might be better translating as 'a move which complicates the game whilst the opponent is in time trouble', is not regarded in the same light. I don't think there is anything controversial there. I think that the phrase 'annoying to very many players' sounds like hand-waving flim-flam. I think the word ungentlemanly works better, because you are setting the context clearly as one which is in the field of etiquette and manners and whatever.