31 Aug 12
Originally posted by kingshillThat sounds like a good idea, but is it legal? Most rules of play I've read say the only notes or writing that is allowed are the actual moves being made.
Over the board I put '=' on my scoresheet every time I'm offered a draw.
If my opponent is harassing me in a tournament I'll call the arbiter over to give him a warning.
After 3 offers I warn the player that any more offers and I'll call the arbiter over
If this is allowed I'd recommend doing so.
31 Aug 12
Originally posted by AldanEtiquette is a matter of general consensus. And there seems to be no consensus at all regarding when to resign. That's why I don't see it as part of chess etiquette. Compare this to handshake before and after an OTB game for example - avoiding it is seen as "bad manners" by everyone.
Yes, you have provided a very good example of when behavior permitted by the rules is nevertheless a breach of good manners. Sadly, some of the contributors to this discussion seem oblivious of this distinction.
31 Aug 12
1 edit
Originally posted by ChessPraxisIt's actually illegal not to do so in the FIDE rules (I think this rule was added relatively recently). FIDE handbook: 9.1
That sounds like a good idea, but is it legal? Most rules of play I've read say the only notes or writing that is allowed are the actual moves being made.
If this is allowed I'd recommend doing so.
31 Aug 12
Originally posted by patrickrutgersThe fact that it is not always possible to say what is, and isn't, good manners does not, of itself, mean that the concept should be ignored or is not relevant.
Speaking of not wanting to introduce another concept, I don’t think you want to conflate manners and etiquette with questions of what is “morally OK.” Doing so is not at all a “bit like” what I said. Manners ain’t morals, and Chess (forum) ain’t Spirituality (forum).
I would say the rules within the game--any game--are in fact quite sufficient for ...[text shortened]... ption “bad manners” is simply one person’s unusual emotional response to how the game is played.
You do not need to go to the rulebook to determine whether insulting a player's mother is inside the rules or not when debating whether it is good manners. It is bad manners, and whether the rules specifically prohibit it or not, makes no difference.
The presence of rules saying 'All players must behave in a sportsmanlike fashion' are required to enable authorites to take disciplinary action if these rules are breached. If such a rule is absent, this does not equate to the authorities agreeing that unsportsmanlike behaviour is acceptable. Nor does it mean that the participants cannot establish common ground as to what is and isn't acceptable behaviour.
Whether the issue of resigning in a hopelessly lost position is good or bad manners is not clear cut, but I object to the idea that 'the rules within the game.....are sufficient for determing what is acceptable behaviour in the game.'
When two badminton teams don't bother to play in front of an audience who have payed a lot of money to come and see them compete in what, for the audience, may a once-in-a-lifetime event, they have behaved selfishly and in a disrespectful manner. Even if this were allowed within the rules of the game, we should condemn their behaviour. I don't need a rulebook to make this judgement. I only need the rulebook to determine whether they can be disqualified and chucked out of the event.
31 Aug 12
Originally posted by iruYeah, by the OP's way of thinking, every World Series, World Cup, and Superbowl loser has exhibited bad manners by playing on until the bitter end.
Contrary to examples from life and other sports, making moves is a core activity in a game of chess. I find it ridiculous to think that your opponent is obliged to stop making moves and resign at some moment and call it "bad manners" if he doesn't.
- Joined
- 18 Jan 07
- Moves
- 12477
31 Aug 12
Originally posted by AldanNo, you still have the wrong end of the stick. Most people here do not disagree with you that good and bad manners exist. What we're disagreeing with is your assessment of what these bad manners are.
Yes, you have provided a very good example of when behavior permitted by the rules is nevertheless a breach of good manners. Sadly, some of the contributors to this discussion seem oblivious of this distinction.
Richard
31 Aug 12
No one in my family would ever tell a guest to take their shoes off on entering the house. We consider it bad manners because we've been brought up this way. Yet if I were somebody's guest for the first time, and they told me to take my shoes off, I would certainly not start complaining loudly about their lack of good manners. This kind of behavior would be considered bad manners in every culture I think.
Originally posted by Paul LeggettI don’t follow this analogy. It’s possible to know in a game of football who is going to win if they have a big enough lead with little time left, but there’s always a final score to play for. How many points did they win by? The final score can vary right to the end of the game even if the win/draw/loss outcome is inevitable. I can enjoy watching two teams play football without even knowing the score.
Yeah, by the OP's way of thinking, every World Series, World Cup, and Superbowl loser has exhibited bad manners by playing on until the bitter end.
In chess, the final score is always 1-0 or 0-1 for a win. The score is not affected by how many moves the game lasts. So when both sides know that the game is decided, what is left to play for? I’m not talking about cases where the loser genuinely thinks he can avoid a loss. I’m talking about players who are playing for nothing more than a delay. Imagine at an OTB tournament I find myself completely lost. Instead of resigning such games, I just get up and go for a walk, forcing my opponent to wait on my clock running out. Is it against the rules? No. But it would be disrespectful to my opponent.
This debate is skewed by either assuming that the winner is asking the loser to resign, or that there are genuine chances on the board to avoid a loss. I’m assuming neither.
Originally posted by iruTell that to any GM doing a simul and you can forget being given a seat. Sure, you can tell him it's your right to do so. And he'll tell you it's his right to agree to only play players who are capable of showing some respect during a game of chess.
Contrary to examples from life and other sports, making moves is a core activity in a game of chess. I find it ridiculous to think that your opponent is obliged to stop making moves and resign at some moment and call it "bad manners" if he doesn't.
31 Aug 12
Originally posted by Paul LeggettActually, I don't think this is a valid comparison. These are time-limited events where there is an expectation that people will continue to the end irrespective of the score. No such expectation exists in chess.
Yeah, by the OP's way of thinking, every World Series, World Cup, and Superbowl loser has exhibited bad manners by playing on until the bitter end.
You may say 'Why is this the case?' to which I would say 'because that is what the overwhelming majority of players/spectators expect'. It's not about what's rational but just about the consensus of opinion, if there is one.