Originally posted by Shinidoki When I'm in a totally won position, i may do several of many things 2 of the most unusual to resign the game myself, or deliberatly blunder so as to give them a draw/win.
the reactions you get are quite interesting.
--if they want rating points they dont deserve, as far as im concerned, they can have them.
If they then have the check to ask wh ...[text shortened]... in a fit of rage "why must i lose to this idiot" then smash the board -- Nimzowitsch style.
Originally posted by Exuma I resign when I can see the eventual mate. Its a way of saying - "Even though you have won, I have seen how you will win, which makes me as good a chess player as you are in this position."
As a number of people have pointed out, playing on in hopeless positions is generally considered bad manners, though of course what constitutes 'hopeless' can be subjective. It is also obviously dependant on the relative strength of the players involved. Strong players who play on in such positions soon acquire reputations for such behaviour.
On the other hand, there's nothing to be gained from resigning too soon. We've all screwed up totally won positions and also managed to swindle lost ones. Even more harrowing are the cases (and they do happen quite a lot) where a player resigns in a drawn (or even winning!) position. Kasparov and Kramnik have both managed to do that against silicon monsters. Another example was a game of mine that finished quite recently: Game 3079040. My opponent as black had played a very accurate game and found the resource 28...Na3+! (which to be honest I'd overlooked). After 29.bxa3 Qa6 seems to force a draw, but instead my opponent resigned! The main line goes 30.Nxb3 Qxa3 31.Qh4 h6 32.Nxd7 Nxb3 33.Qd4! Ra8 34.Qb2 Nd2+! 35.Qxd2 Qa1+ 36.Kc2 Qa2+ 37.Kc1. There are several other variations, but they all seem to lead to a draw.
Originally posted by Exuma I resign when I can see the eventual mate. Its a way of saying - "Even though you have won, I have seen how you will win, which makes me as good a chess player as you are in this position."
This might comfort you, but im not sure how logical it is. If you were as good, you wouldn't have wandered into a lost position in the first place.
As for the original poster, ive noticed that he is playing people who are 1000 or 1100, so not resigning is okay because players that rating are extremely unpredictable. When he starts playing stronger players it will become evident just how futile playing in lost positions can be because good players know a lot more endgame theory and will get a big material lead that is insurmountable.
Copy (slightly amended) of my post in the Thread 'when do you properly resign ?' on 30 Dec '06 16:31.
"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. Otherwise play until you are mated or obtain a draw.
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, despite all his complaining, apparently did not know how to win.
IMO when you can see the mate, thats the time to resign. Before that, there is no point. You can learn from more than just wins and draws, and who knows, sometimes you get lucky. By a strictly logical perspective, if i sat down and played a game of chess against kasparov i should resign before i make my first move, because there is no chance i could possibly win from that point onward. But there is always something to learn, and sometimes what you do--in any game-- just before you go down teaches you more, and tells you more about yourself than 'real life' as its called.
I can fully understand being pissed off when someone goes until the end of their timeout over and over just to stall the game as long as possible, and i certainly don't endorse that--but to be honest, i really like to play a game all the way to checkmate, theres something complete about it.
I believe that you should resign if you are a queen down (with no hope of getting equivelant material) or Going to definitley lose (i.e its gonna be mate in 3-5 moves).
Personally If I am a rook or equivalant down I generally do not resign if the game is online. However I am a firm believer in chess etiquette and generally if the game is in Real life with no way of me capitalising on the position I will resign
I never resign
27 May '07 15:30
Back to Top