Etiquette

Originally posted by coentje
Nobody needs to resign and all are welcome to play on as long as they feel like they are still having enough fun in the match as they want from it, or even beyong that point 🙂

You should be prepared though that sometimes you will be playing out a game like this (Game 2070266)
[fen]8/4N3/2N1N1N1/8/2N4k/8/6K1/8 b - - 13 82[/fen]


Please be caref ...[text shortened]... ill in progress and i could still give away a draw to this person if i am not carefull enough 🙂

That's great. I don't think I've ever seen anything like it.

Fischer and Petrosian play that game where there are 4 queens on the board (2 of each color.)

But, I've never seen 5 Knights of the same color.

Originally posted by coentje
Nobody needs to resign and all are welcome to play on as long as they feel like they are still having enough fun in the match as they want from it, or even beyong that point 🙂

You should be prepared though that sometimes you will be playing out a game like this (Game 2070266)
[fen]8/4N3/2N1N1N1/8/2N4k/8/6K1/8 b - - 13 82[/fen]


Please be caref ...[text shortened]... ill in progress and i could still give away a draw to this person if i am not carefull enough 🙂

Pretty!

Originally posted by 7ate9
nOOb players??

its an online gaming term, he must play halo or something.



i have two games right now, i cant post them because they are still ongoing, that i am starting to turn around. i guess the fact that i am higher rated than them counts.


However if i was playing Deep thought for instance, i would consider it an insult to both him and me to continue. (i may look at the game to find my mistake though).

Dont know whether i am right or wrong, but i wouldnt slow down the game, thats just petty.

I have a game ongoing where I have Pawn and Rook vs Lone king. Its very annoying not being a subscriber, wanting to start a new game, knowing this one is won and having the guy tell me "there is such a thing as a draw".

I dont really balme him. I am only a 1200 afterall and could be some idiot. So i guess i have to live with it. I know that he wont take several days per move. I sympathise with players that experience this and I think thats a really bad attitude to take as long as possible. I think for more experienced players not resigning is rude. Especially when a subscriber is playing a non subscriber. blah blah blah

HOWEVER...

I ASK YOU THIS.......is it not more rude to ask a player to resign?

Originally posted by Red Night
That's great. I don't think I've ever seen anything like it.

Fischer and Petrosian play that game where there are 4 queens on the board (2 of each color.)

But, I've never seen 5 Knights of the same color.

once in an OTB game i managed to get 4 queens as well but since i was still inexperienced i managed to stale mate my opponent.......suffices to say that was not one of my proudest moments, lol

btw. the final position 😀

Originally posted by lafredo
I have a game ongoing where I have Pawn and Rook vs Lone king. Its very annoying not being a subscriber, wanting to start a new game, knowing this one is won and having the guy tell me "there is such a thing as a draw".

I dont really balme him. I am only a 1200 afterall and could be some idiot. So i guess i have to live with it. I know that he wont ta ...[text shortened]... blah blah

HOWEVER...

I ASK YOU THIS.......is it not more rude to ask a player to resign?

It is not very polite to ask your opponent to resign, but you might hint at it. You could make a suggestion saying that there is no shame in resigning a game that is impossible to win 😉 but still the other one is free to play on as they feel like.

I kind of like it too when they play on in a lost position, gives me possibilities to play with things i normally never get to play with 😀

Originally posted by Red Night
If i follow the game correctly, you are actually down a Q and a Bishop for two Rooks and a Pawn. And you have some counter play.

yep, I should've continued, but resigned as a knee-jerk reflex after I saw I would lose my queen against so much stronger opponent. would've probably lost anyway (fritz says 2.30 pawns for white), but still, resigning was premature. lesson learned.

Originally posted by coentje
once in an OTB game i managed to get 4 queens as well but since i was still inexperienced i managed to stale mate my opponent.......suffices to say that was not one of my proudest moments, lol

btw. the final position 😀

[fen]8/8/2N1N3/4NN1k/5N2/8/6K1/8 b - - 19 85[/fen]

That's just too funny!

Earlier, a number of posters suggested that lower rated players should be allowed to play on in lost positions to learn.

I have to ask those guys now: what is to be learned from this gem?

That five knights can look like the Blue Angels flying the missing wing formation?

Originally posted by Red Night
That's just too funny!

Earlier, a number of posters suggested that lower rated players should be allowed to play on in lost positions to learn.

I have to ask those guys now: what is to be learned from this gem?

That five knights can look like the Blue Angels flying the missing wing formation?

Well he learned how knights can work together and be very strong pieces at times.

For me, well i had some practice in mating with knights (yes, i am myself a low rated player too, lol, only 1350 or something like that at the moment, so i had lots to learn as well)

You will not catch me playing on in a game like that unless i know my opponent personally and am just messing with him but i like it when they play on, gives me a chance to try some end games you normally never come across or to set a move record 😀

Originally posted by Red Night
That's just too funny!

Earlier, a number of posters suggested that lower rated players should be allowed to play on in lost positions to learn.

I have to ask those guys now: what is to be learned from this gem?

That five knights can look like the Blue Angels flying the missing wing formation?

He could have got a draw by stalemate if they weren't careful enough. The onus is on the leader to win the game, personally I quite like delivering the checkmate rather than have an opponent resign against me. If he/she's taking 8 days per move then that's a different matter, that's just poor etiquette and the sign of a bad loser.

Originally posted by Red Night
At what point should a player resign?

How much material should a player lose before he resigns?

I've got a couple of games going now where I'm up a Queen for a Rook. The only thing that has happened is that my opponents have started to move slower.

I've got a tournament game where I'm up two knights in the first 8 moves.

Earlier, in another ...[text shortened]... good chess etiquette to resign if you go down a Rook or a Queen without any real prospects?

Resigning is for the benefit of the loser, not the winner.

I would consider it bad etiquite for a losing player to deliberately stall out of spite, but other than that, he can play on as long as he wants without an etiquite breach.

If the game is truly hopeless, it ought not to take much thought for the winner to finish the job. Personally, I enjoy having a game or two that have reached a point of requiring no effort on my part. It's kind of like the last day of the Tour de France for the person winning the race.

If that causes trouble for non-subscribers, that's trouble they're bringing upon themselves which should not be blamed on their opponent.

There have been a few times I've been surprised by how long my opponent plays on without resigning. Usually strong players are better able to see how hopeless their situation is. But being surprised is not being annoyed.

Originally posted by 7ate9
even if an opponent slows down the game, it is still their game as much as yours. tactically they do have a right to do what they want during the time frame that was agreed upon by both.

i don't have too much of a problem with letting the clock run down while i'm ridding a winner. being humble when you come back to the game is vital, because if an opponent ...[text shortened]... game. i try to always use the board in these situations, if i can't get to that skull first.

It is interesting hearing all of the opinions. A lot of people seem to think that they have some right to play on, stall, frustrate, aggravate, and exact some sort of revenge.

What strikes me is that this is unusual to on-line chess.

Very hard to play on in a hopeless situation in an OTB game where your opponent sits there frowning across the board at you.

In an old-fashioned correspondence game, you would have known your opponent. Again very hard to show him the dis-repect inherent in playing on down a rook.

But, on RHP, we're all anonymous and apparently free to be jerks and discourteous.

I for one, pledge to play honorably from now on. I will not stall in a losing position and I will show my opponents the proper level of respect by resigning when it is called for.