I deem it very bad manners and insulting for a player who has an obviously lost position to play on in the forlorn hope that his adversary will commit a childish blunder. RHP appears to approve and institutionalize these bad manners in the posted diagrams of checkmates appearing on the home page as almost all of these diagrammed checkmates involve games with such a wide disparity in material strength and position as to indicate that the games had been lost many moves before the checkmate. What to you think?
It may be bad manners but as has been said on several previous threads on this topic there is nothing in the rules to prevent someone stretching a game out as long as possible. I suspect that in some cases it is an attempt to minimise the points loss from a defeat by hoping that the opponent will have some other wins in the meantime. Personally, I find it disheartening to play clearly lost positions and would rather resign and move on to the next match but clearly not everyone feels the same way.
Originally posted by AldanIt's your opponent's right to make a move, if he has a legal move to make. Patience is an attribute of a chess player. 😉
I deem it very bad manners and insulting for a player who has an obviously lost position to play on in the forlorn hope that his adversary will commit a childish blunder. RHP appears to approve and institutionalize these bad manners in the posted diagrams of checkmates appearing on the home page as almost all of these diagrammed checkmates involve games wit ...[text shortened]... as to indicate that the games had been lost many moves before the checkmate. What to you think?
Originally posted by iruManners are what separate man from brutes apes. Yes, I will most definitely play on but not knowingly with brutes. I am glad to relate that several of my recent adversaries have demonstrated good manners by resigning in lost positions. I have done this myself and will continue to do so.
Good or bad manners exist outside of chess board. Anything that happens on the chess board is fine as long as it is within the rules. My best advice is to stop complaining and play on.
I, like you, prefer not to play a won position out to the bitter end. But it's been pointed out before, that many players enjoy giving checkmate. I venture that it is just as rude to resign prematurely as it is to drag on a lost game. I have taken to PMing my opponent in a lost position to ask which they would prefer. Recently, I offered a resignation after going down a knight for a pawn on move 7, my opponent replied that he would prefer to apply checkmate. We played on and I took back the knight and most of his other pieces. 35 moves later, I was finally able to checkmate him.
Originally posted by AldanI don't disagree, but many players here are products of the internet blitz age, have never played tournament OTB or serious correspondence chess in the postal era and are simply ignorant of these conventions. Some will identify that they are losing but be unaware that their position is hopeless, lost or resignable.
Manners are what separate man from brutes apes. Yes, I will most definitely play on but not knowingly with brutes. I am glad to relate that several of my recent adversaries have demonstrated good manners by resigning in lost positions. I have done this myself and will continue to do so.
Others believe that because FIDE rules say that the game is won when the opponent resigns there is an obligation upon the opponent to resign when their position is deemed lost by "others".
I usually (but not exclusively) choose to resign when an opponent has demonstrated a clear path to victory rather than simply be material up. That way I can save myself the agony of trying to defend a hopeless position with the confidence that the opponent possessed the necessary skill to win. Bobby Fischer's 60 memorable games has the great man himself playing on in a position he described as "busted" against Walther, because he began to see "swindling chances." This seems a reasonable "playing on" example to follow but don't forget that in places where players are not of Master strength or close the thresholds are bound to be much lower...
We should never be ashamed to demonstrate our winning skills with cold clinical accuracy when we have plenty of time to think should our opponent ask it of us. There will be a blitz tournament somewhere, sometime, when we will be glad of the practice.
Originally posted by Long BarrowA very thoughtful comment!
I don't disagree, but many players here are products of the internet blitz age, have never played tournament OTB or serious correspondence chess in the postal era and are simply ignorant of these conventions. Some will identify that they are losing but be unaware that their position is hopeless, lost or resignable.
Others believe that because FIDE ru ...[text shortened]... will be a blitz tournament somewhere, sometime, when we will be glad of the practice.
It looks like it was Game 9442085 that brought forth this blast.
kingboss030 - Aldan
Final Position
A small stroll through the games of kingboss030 will reveal he has
been stalemated 3 times when he was totally lost.
Game 6763960 *
Game 6679701
Game 6471540
Game 8898175
Are you going to tell him he was wrong in playing on?
I'm not. I'm saying well played.
You no doubt would have resigned each game a long time ago.
kingboss030 did not and saved himself 1½ points.
You will also note that kingboss030 plays to the mate in the majority of his games.
He is playing to rules of the game. Checkmate.
Your opponent chooses when to resign not you and having at pop at every
log on position and every player who has not resigned because you think they
should is going too far.
The majority of the lads on here are home and casual players. You may think it is
bad manners but some players on here think it is bad form too resign
and not give their opponent the pleasure of delivering checkmate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And by the way in the above game you could have mated your opponent on move 35.
Instead you, and not your opponent, prolonged the game another 20 moves.
Edit: * Actually it was kingboss030 who stalemated his opponent in that game.
(did not see thread from kingboss030 about players not resigning.) 🙂
Originally posted by cadwahThumbs up for the humor, Cad.
...Cue Greenpawn with a game fished out of the murky waters of RHP with such a scenario...
To the OP: You list yourself as semi-retired lawyer. When representing a client, even if the case seems hopeless, do you still use every legal means to help your case?
The "laws" of chess allow the side that is behind some chances to draw the game (3-fold repetition of position, lack of mating material, stalemate). If an opponent wishes to try for one of these options, they are within the rules of the game. It also could be an inexperienced player wishing to learn how to turn an advantage into a checkmate by watching your example.
You are off to an excellent start (22W-1L) here, but are you really qualified to judge, mistake free, the future outcome of any particular game? The question of "why won't my opponent resign?" comes up often in the forums. My advice is to react just as you would in a face-to-face, across the board game. You should show good manners and wait. And certainly not complain to the audience as you are doing here in the forums.
Originally posted by MontyMooseInterested in opera too. You know where this is going don't you. Drum roll please.
Thumbs up for the humor, Cad.
To the OP: You list yourself as semi-retired lawyer. When representing a client, even if the case seems hopeless, do you still use every legal means to help your case?
"It's not over till the fat lady sings"
Originally posted by AldanI have only made a couple checkmates, but apparently RHP does not like them because they have never appeared on the home page.
I deem it very bad manners and insulting for a player who has an obviously lost position to play on in the forlorn hope that his adversary will commit a childish blunder. RHP appears to approve and institutionalize these bad manners in the posted diagrams of checkmates appearing on the home page as almost all of these diagrammed checkmates involve games wit ...[text shortened]... as to indicate that the games had been lost many moves before the checkmate. What to you think?