At the chess club of a local university, I lose lots of chess games. Sometimes I will tell my opponent, "I see that I am in a hopeless position, but if you don't mind I'd like to continue awhile, and see how things come about." Maybe the guy has a bus to catch or would rather play a stronger opponent instead of watch me push wood around the board. People have always responded very nicely.
Yet I see nothing wrong with asking an opponent to resign. If there is no chance of reaching a stalemate, or if the finish is so clear or material so lopsided that a beginner couldn't fail to lose, then why play on? If there is no challenge and your opponent does not have a reason (beyond pride) to continue on, then by all means, be comfortable in raising the topic of his resignation. If your opponent is really getting clobbered, then at some point, the lack of a resignation begins to look more like disrespect than a healthy appetite for competition.
CASE IN POINT: I was having a friendly yet competitive OTB game with a coworker. I am a tad bit better than him, but this time, I was getting trounced. There is ALWAYS the possibility of a blunder by us sub 2000 chumps, so I played on.
For the record, I had a king and bishop and a few insignificant pawns vs. his King, Queen, and rook and 1 pawn. He's up by NINE!!! Call it fate, distraction, excitement at closing in on a win of this "important" game, whatever you like, as he was gobbling up my pawns, he dropped his queen on a square that Mr. Bishop just happened to control. Bye bye Queen. It ended up King and Bish vs King and rook, which of course is a DRAW.
Now, I know many of you feel that if you are down 9 you should resign. Blunders happen all the time. But if you are getting clobbered and your opponent feels DISRESPECTED, then why the &&%$&@!# is he not just checkmating you and getting it over with? Answer me that.
Let me tell you all what getting CLOBBERED is NOT. If your opponent cannot checkmate you in the next 15 moves, you AINT getting clobbered. Getting clobbered is 3 or 4 or maybe 5 moves from checkmate. It's these high and mighty types that are up a few pawns and maybe a minor piece and then want you to throw in the towel because (listen closely) they dont feel confident in their abilities to deliver the checkmate. They fear THEY may blunder. They are lazy and want the easy, cheap win while they somehow got the upperhand.
"Resign dude, I'm up a pawn", that's the mindset of the pro-resign crowd.
Dont disrespect your opponent by resigning to him. It's shameful.
Originally posted by cheater1You have obviously never played in a long-game OTB tournament. When you are playing for 12+ hours a day and some jackass is taking 10 minutes a move in a K+Q vs K situation it is VERY annoying.
CASE IN POINT: I was having a friendly yet competitive OTB game with a coworker. I am a tad bit better than him, but this time, I was getting trounced. There is ALWAYS the possibility of a blunder by us sub 2000 chumps, so I played on.
For the record, I had a king and bishop and a few insignificant pawns vs. his King, Queen, and rook and 1 pawn. He's up ...[text shortened]... pro-resign crowd.
Dont disrespect your opponent by resigning to him. It's shameful.
I suppose it's OK to play on in a clearly lost game, but it's definitely frustrating for me as I'm not a subscriber and therefore have a limited # of games. The one time I did ask someone to resign, he claimed that he was about to but after I asked he decided to play as long as possible 🙁
Originally posted by RECUVICAs a beginning player I often resigned games early that were lost in material as I knew I did not have the depth of knowledge to come back and be a challenge. Now I am working my way to the end in most games, but usually apologize to my opponent for boring them. I know it is likely I will loose, but I am studying how I am being trapped in the end, as much as how to avoid those traps for as long as possible.
Continuing to play in any chess game when it appears to be lost is perfectly acceptable and is not considered rude. Many apparently 'lost' games have been won or drawn in such circumstances,however asking an opponent to resign is rude and should be avoided so long as no game rules have been broken. Clearly a player with only a King facing an opponent with ov ...[text shortened]... uld ask an opponent to resign. This is simple bad manners, as it is also quite unecessary!😀
Want a game Ice?😉
some people when they are loosing a game, begin to move very slowly: if the timeout is set to 3 days, they make move at the last minute of the 3rd day etc. so the game could last a couple of monthes and it can drive anyone mad. the only way to solve this problem is to set a suitable time controls: i prefer 3/3 or 3/7 at maximum. at least they ought to make a move during this period - one move closer to the end of a game.
Originally posted by AndaluzI play quicker when I find a game in particular game interesting, or funny, or enjoying, or something. This is often when I have the advantage.
some people when they are loosing a game, begin to move very slowly: if the timeout is set to 3 days, they make move at the last minute of the 3rd day etc. so the game could last a couple of monthes and it can drive anyone mad. the only way to solve this problem is to set a suitable time controls: i prefer 3/3 or 3/7 at maximum. at least they ought to make a move during this period - one move closer to the end of a game.
This could look like that I am playing slower when I am in trouble. Perhaps I have to think longer, and harder, in those games.