Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Only Chess Forum

Only Chess Forum

  1. Standard member RBHILL
    Acts 13:48
    06 Jan '06 23:55
    Is it one or the other or both.

    The question is about resigning in a game of chess on correspondence chess when you know that you should and there is no chance of winnig left?

    trevor33 says on his profile and I agree with him here:
    I will resign in hopeless situations and hope that others will do the same.
  2. Standard member Ringtailhunter
    Track drifter ®
    06 Jan '06 23:59
    Originally posted by RBHILL
    Is it one or the other or both.

    The question is about resigning in a game of chess on correspondence chess when you know that you should and there is no chance of winnig left?

    trevor33 says on his profile and I agree with him here:
    I will resign in hopeless situations and hope that others will do the same.
    Unless you are heldon and don't need the moves what is the point?
  3. 07 Jan '06 00:13
    Originally posted by Ringtailhunter
    Unless you are heldon and don't need the moves what is the point?
    there are a lot of threads that try to answer this. Some people do, some don't.

    I usually don't resign because I play people around the 1200 rating and they are prone to blunders, like me, and accidently causing a stalemate. I know this doesn't usually apply to higher levels, but stranger things have happened in my games.
  4. Standard member XanthosNZ
    Cancerous Bus Crash
    07 Jan '06 00:26
    Every time this topic comes up I give the same answer (in fact I'm saving a copy on my computer for the next occasion it comes up). A player should resign when they have nothing to gain from continuing the game. This could be the slight possibility of a draw or learning something by watching a stronger player exploit an advantage. Once that point is reached they should resign.

    Of course only the player himself knows when this point is reached. Anyone calling for someone else to resign is stupid as a player is always within their rights to continue playing the game. In fact if someone was to ask me to resign (either through ingame messages or the much more vulgar public thread) I would feel that I had something to gain by taking as much time as possible for each and every move and playing to the bitter end.

    I gain the satifaction of frustrating a player who has shown themselves to be completely bereft of class.
  5. 07 Jan '06 00:59 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by XanthosNZ
    Every time this topic comes up I give the same answer (in fact I'm saving a copy on my computer for the next occasion it comes up). A player should resign when they have nothing to gain from continuing the game. This could be the slight possibility of a draw or learning something by watching a stronger player exploit an advantage. Once that point is reache ...[text shortened]... satifaction of frustrating a player who has shown themselves to be completely bereft of class.
    I agree with what you said, however, I would add that many times people continue playing hopeless games, haphazardly moving pieces with no plan or idea. Sure, they have the right to do that, but that doesn't make it right. I don't mind these resignation threads, because even though they are repetitive they remind people that it is acceptable to resign. Chess unlike many other games and sports has the option of resignation and it is not rude to simply quit midgame if you are losing. For example, wouldn't you be angry if you were playing someone in tennis and down two sets they simply walked off the court? Probably, at least I would be. But this is not so in chess. I guess what I'm saying is that newcomers in the game of chess often keep moving and playing, not because they feel they have something to gain, but rather they are uneducated about the fact that resigning in chess is an acceptable and often times recommended action. These posts aren't superfluous, newcomers to this site should learn that playing out meaningless positions is not the norm, rather they should save themselves and their opponents some time and dignitiy and resign. I wouldn't ask someone to resign, that is quite arrogant and conceited, but I would post in the forum, like I am doing now, that moving your pieces for the sake of moving is really disrespectful to your opponent. If you feel you have something to gain or learn, then by all means continue, but I think new players especially but also some old players should know that there is nothing wrong with resigning in a clearly lost position and in fact it is in those lost positions usually the only good move.
  6. Standard member XanthosNZ
    Cancerous Bus Crash
    07 Jan '06 01:05 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by Gambitzoid
    I agree with what you said, however, I would add that many times people continue playing hopeless games, haphazardly moving pieces with no plan or idea. Sure, they have the right to do that, but that doesn't make it right. I don't mind these resignation threads, because even though they are repetitive they remind people that it is acceptable to resign. Ch learly lost position and in fact it is in those lost positions usually the only good move.
    It sure is lucky we have you to tell us all about those 'uneducated players'.
  7. Subscriber no1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    07 Jan '06 01:07
    Originally posted by Gambitzoid
    I agree with what you said, however, I would add that many times people continue playing hopeless games, haphazardly moving pieces with no plan or idea. Sure, they have the right to do that, but that doesn't make it right. I don't mind these resignation threads, because even though they are repetitive they remind people that it is acceptable to resign. Ch ...[text shortened]... learly lost position and in fact it is in those lost positions usually the only good move.
    That's a very good point that I don't think I ever thought of.
  8. Standard member Grandmouster
    ChessObsessed
    07 Jan '06 05:44 / 3 edits
    speaking off.....
    (game in progress)
    [gid]gameid=1566601[/gid]
  9. Standard member Grandmouster
    ChessObsessed
    07 Jan '06 05:47
    for some reason, it wont link to the game, sorry
  10. 07 Jan '06 07:28
    Originally posted by Grandmouster
    for some reason, it wont link to the game, sorry
    I think you only need the number.
  11. 07 Jan '06 08:11
    Whining about opponents who don't resign is often a way of compensation for insecurity and probably stems from a belief that one is superior to other people in a general sense.

    Two years ago I played in a tournament where between rounds a player was going on in a discussion with me about how rude and inconsiderate he gets when his losing opponents don't resign.

    In the next round, after the games had started and I and my opponent were already making moves, this guy comes up to us. Turns out he had brought no equipment to the tournament, and he and his opponent had no board, pieces or clock. He asked if he could use our "extra" equipment. We were playing with my clock and my opponents board and set, so both of us had to do some digging around to accomodate him, interrupting our game. When our game was finished, this guy's game was continuing. We had to stick around for another hour to get our equipment back.

    I guess wasting people's time is rude only when somebody else is doing it, and some snobs never examine their own behavior.
  12. Subscriber BigDoggProblem
    The Advanced Mind
    07 Jan '06 08:11 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by RBHILL
    Is it one or the other or both.

    The question is about resigning in a game of chess on correspondence chess when you know that you should and there is no chance of winnig left?

    trevor33 says on his profile and I agree with him here:
    I will resign in hopeless situations and hope that others will do the same.
    Playing a game out until checkmate is certainly ethical. Perhaps masochistic, but perfectly allowable under the rules.

    It is poor etiquette to expect an opponent to resign. You should be willing to play the game out until checkmate if needed. In fact, you should hone your skill at finishing them off quickly. It's good practice on not blowing won games.
  13. 07 Jan '06 09:44
    Originally posted by XanthosNZ
    Every time this topic comes up I give the same answer (in fact I'm saving a copy on my computer for the next occasion it comes up). A player should resign when they have nothing to gain from continuing the game. This could be the slight possibility of a draw or learning something by watching a stronger player exploit an advantage. Once that point is reache ...[text shortened]... satifaction of frustrating a player who has shown themselves to be completely bereft of class.
    For once I completely agree with you.

    There are other games/sports where resigning is seen as part of the game, for example Snooker. Occasionally a player will return to the table on his turn even when he would need about 9 swnookers to win [ie, no chance]...this they do for experience and practice, nobody considers it unethical or bad manners etc.
  14. 07 Jan '06 15:24
    When I resign I have always considered is something I do for my own sake to avoid the frustration of having to play out a game I have really already lost. I have, in casual OTB games, had my opponent ask me to play out my lost position a couple times in order see some idea played out. I am also thankful to my opponent here who let me play out the classic smothered mate. You can't always assume your opponent wants you to resign.
  15. Standard member DeepThought
    Losing the Thread
    07 Jan '06 15:39
    Originally posted by Grandmouster
    speaking off.....
    (game in progress)
    Game 1566601
    There