I think this depends heavily on your strength and your opponent's strength.
You never HAVE to resign. It is mainly a question of etiquette.
Chess is a game and games should be fun or have some redeeming value to you in order to justify the time you invest. If you are getting something out of the game then press on! You may feel you are lost but you don't know how to finish the game. Imagine if you always resigned "lost" games and then one day you play someone and they are in what you would consider a resignable position, but they play on and you don't know how to finish them!
However, you could always resign, plug the game into Fritz (or an other computer opponent) and play the winning side of the game to learn the finish.
Play until you are not getting anything out of the game. If you are prolonging the game to "punish" the winner, you should resign.
Game 2895496
Game 2895497
look at these 2 games - I had advantage in both of them, but I think that my opponent resigned too fast.
Here is a recent game of mine where I was beat and thought about resigning, but one move before I decided to resign, I decided to try something and see what would happen and I won as a result.
Game 2930631.
Of course I also have a few games where I could not believe my opponent did not resign and then I goofed up (which I really don't feel like looking for.) :-)
Then of course there are times where dead loss is just dead loss, so just resign.
I guess resigning is a moral thing and you have to listen to your inner voice.
Originally posted by Very RustyOooh...that's one of my pet peeves. I don't mind someone playing to the end when it's a lost cause for them. It's their right.
Resign the move just before you opponent is going to checkmate you, then you can both be upset....LOL....
However if they do choose to play to the end -- don't resign the move before checkmate -- that's being an @sshole.
Nonny
Lower rated players tend to keep on playing.
Higher rated players tend to resign even after a small mistake.
Therefore - I keep on playing to lower rated players, even if they are a piece over. And I don't mind if opponents keep on playing even if they have a dead lost position.
I feel it is a bad etiquette to try to make the opponent resign. They have all the rights to keep on until the king is mated.
But if you only have six games going at most, as the non subs have, I can think of their nuisance having games going and going forever blocking any start of a new game.
Originally posted by biggest bI suggest you resign either; A/ against a better player when you know that you could win from his position, until then there is nothing unreasonable in playing on to learn. B/ against a roughly equal player or someone you would normally beat, when you know that particular player knows how to win from that position. Otherwise play until you are mated or obtain a draw.
[b]Does one resign when he is certain he has no chance to win ..... I want to fight the battle to the death but don't want to waste the time of another more skilled player at my benefit and certainly not his.
Look at game No. 2507347 and the associated thread 'Refusing to let the game end' (last post : 17 Dec '06 16:53) for a case in point. Here White moaned that Black was unjustifiably prolonging the game by checking repeatedly, implyimg that he should resign. In fact White had a simple win on his 48th, 50th, 52nd, 54th, 56th, and 58th moves, but allowed Black to draw by the 'Position Repeated Three Times' Law, so this was a case where Black was justified in playing on as his opponent apparently did not know how to win.
Originally posted by Essex 3Good advice.
I suggest you resign either; A/ against a better player when you know that you could win from his position, until then there is nothing unreasonable in playing on to learn. B/ against a roughly equal player or someone you would normally beat, when you know that particular player knows how to win from that position.
When and if I resign depends on several things. If I'm barely down in the end game I wont resign, I'll play for a draw. If Im down a minor piece or even a rook I wont resign if the player has shown me mistakes of his own during the game, I'll hope for a blunder and then a draw. If down by a minor piece or a rook to a player who is sharp as a razor I will likely resign the game to him after he proves he knows what hes doing in the end game, generally only a few moves.
One game I recently resigned to a 1400+ player in the latter stages of the opening. I blundered the whole thing and found my position disastorous and down 2 pieces. I resigned out of embarrassment. lol...
Originally posted by Falco LombardiI agree... I also liked to try to resign BEFORE getting mated. I think I've been mated only 2 or 3 times cuz I just didn't see the death-blow.
I resign when I have no chance of winning, or am down a large amount of material and have no positional compensation. To me, people that never resign are rude.
I love when a user PM's me to say, "Hey, why did you quit the game... I was going to mate you!"
I PM them back to say, "I resigned BECAUSE you were going to mate me. It's rude for me to force you to keep moving when I know I'm beat. Enjoy your next game."
P-