Well, yes and no.
What Dave suggests seems good on the surface, but ignores the fact
that in competitive game play one should make no comments to his
opponent during the game. A competitive game concludes at
checkmate or when an opponent decides it is time to let it go, NOT
when the player with the upper hand believes it should end. One
need not apologize to ANY opponent for wanting to continue a lost
game. Do not apologize for your right to play on. The time for
critiques comes when a competitive game has concluded, and your
opponent is willing to make constructive comments.
However, in fairness to Dave, commentary between players during a
casual, informal game is normal and usually welcomed by both.
This would be correct in an OTB TOURNEY situation...but this being
correspondance chess and having a dialogue box makes it only
courteous to do this whether the game is rated or unrated.
I have already learned the people that I have played whether they
chat or not...and I always respect that.
The difference between an OTB rated game and a rated game on here
is that if your opponent is talking or doing something stupid you can
complain to the TD...here...well...al you can do is bitch about it in the
forums. I think all remember my story about the kid I played in that
Greenville tourney.
All in all though...a game is not won or over untill checkmate,
stalemate, resignation, or a draw agreed...or you or your opponent
dies.
So play on and enjoy!
Dave
I think we should make a difference between OTB and CC chess. In
competitive games OTB there's also the factor TIME. Last year I
managed to save two absolutely lost games. One on time (my
opponent had only seconds and I had a comfortable 20 minutes). His
position was overwhelming (pieces and pawns vs my King and 2 or 3
pawns). He was only two moves away from checkmating me, but his
flag went down. So, I was the winner. Sad for my opponent who just
couldn't believe it. Luck DOES exist in chess!
In the other game I was down a few pieces, but again with much more
time on my clock than my opponent. Mate was still a long way to go
(according to the post-mortem analysis by Fritz6 back home: 10
moves). Of course, I couldn't play for a win or even a draw. But with so
much time on my clock vs his 1-2 minutes, I set up a trap which
eventually led to stalemate, which was what I aimed at. He fell for my
trap. Are this 'stolen' wins? I don't think so. It's all in the game!
cheerio! Jan.
It's ridiculous to complain about the rules of a game (ie time controls)
when you (tacitly) agreed to them by playing the game in the first
place. If you lose due to mismanagement of time, you lose -- full
stop. So it IS "all in the game", as Jan so rightly says.
Luckily, here at RHP we can draw out our losing position for days, if
not weeks! That's where the question of chess etiquite came up, I
believe. It does annoy me to have to force a win in a seriously uneven
match, but I will always respect my opponents right to make a move.
After all, I'll get the point eventually, right? We have (tacitly) agreed
to play a game with a 3, 7, or 14 day time control. If we don't like the
fact that our opponent is taking advantage of that, then tough! you
certainly don't have to play him or her again. However, if you DO
seem to be taking an unnecessary amount of pleasure wasting my
time in a lost position, don't expect to play ME again. I'm more than
patient IF the situation or the opponent deserves it.
The only time, in general, that this would become an real issue for me
is in tournament play and it is holding up the match, but I haven't
been around long enough to get in on one of those.
Best wishes, and don't ever feel like you have to resign if you don't
want to. If you're nice about it though, ask your opponent if he minds!
--Rein
Hi Johan, long time no speak. I wasn't talking about our games, i am
happy with people playing on in lost (drunk) positions, lol. I have
broad shoulders and pretty much don't mind if i win or lose, now if i
played you in a tourney i might be a touch more sensitive, :-)
Drop me a mail sometime Johan we can catch up with the rugby world!
your friend Tony
All players have the right to play out their games until forced to
resign, should they wish to do so. This is an undisputable right of
chess play.
Now, granted, good chess etiquette would suggest that one abandon a
completely lost position. Strong mature chessplayers who possess a
good understanding of the game will certainly resign when continuing
is a waste of time for both players.
However, it is important to realize not all players here are 1) mature
and 2) strong chessplayers. You may find some will play on
needlessly simply to annoy their opponent for whatever reason. They
may do so simply because they can. Others, however, may lack the
skill to play well, and, understanding they are getting crushed, may
actually be forcing their opponent to give them something more than
the loss of the game – a lesson in HOW to play better.
I take the approach that if my opponent is losing; he has every right
to make me win my game right down to checkmate. And I absolutely
don't mind - I always enjoy playing a winning position.
Actually, that is not entirely true. If one gets bogged down in
hopelessly lost games (and I believe they have a right to play it out),
it really does take away from the focus on winnable games. I'm not
sure if that quote was in the era of correspondence/internet chess. I
am guessing that in games with higher rated players, that they tend
to resign early and lower rated games typically go until "the end."
Both worlds collide on this site. Kirk
It's true about higher and lower...if I make a blunder and drop a pawn
or two I don't fret too much and hope my tactical play can get them
back...but say I drop a whole rook or something...I might just go
ahead and give it up right then.
Dave
ps..Tarkatower made that quote in the 1920's I think...so it doesn't
totally apply..but then again it does
Let's just say it does apply! No need to dance on the fence.
Granted, dropping a rook without compensation against a GM, IM or
strong master, or even expert, should cause one to consider
resignation as a nice way to conclude an embarrassing game.
However, it is a good rule to continue play as long as one is
encouraged to play, which is to say that the opponent seems to show,
by the moves played, some difficulty in finding the winning path. I do
believe you would continue play in this situation.
