Originally posted by nickybuttBasically, resigning in a lost position means that you think your opponent will win this easily. Therefore, playing on in a lost position means that you don't think your opponent will win it (easily). Some people see this in the way that you have little or no respect for your opponent's chess skills. It's pretty much a case of how good or bad your opponent plays and how much time he has left.
I never do, but I have played against quite a few who does. It doesn't bother me, after all I could leave the site tomorrow and there is no rule against it, but what do you all mean? Is it bad sportmanship, or just playing your chance.
Ofcourse, there are also jerks who simply stall games just to annoy their opponents. That's definitely bad sportmanship.
Of course some people don't even think of it in terms of sportsmanship.
I played such a game.
My opponent was unaware that is actually a courteous thing to resign a lost game. He was just trying his best for the entire match.
Once I explained it to him and mentioned that the Grandmasters do it all the time. He apologized and seemed grateful for the information.
I think it comes from the teaching that resigning is giving up.
Couple this with the teaching that you should never give up. (observed in the U.S. , others may speak about other cultures)
Then presto you have a bunch of players not resigning games.
Originally posted by nickybuttTo some of us, it is bad sportsmanship, but to others it's not. There is nothing in the rules that says they are not allowed to "stall" the game by taking an obsessive amount of time to move, or to play on in a lost position.
I never do, but I have played against quite a few who does. It doesn't bother me, after all I could leave the site tomorrow and there is no rule against it, but what do you all mean? Is it bad sportmanship, or just playing your chance.
I have played on in seemingly lost games before, much to the displeasure of my opponents, and sometimes they make terrible errors that let me back into the game. As much as it is good form to resign in a lost game, I believe that an opponent must work for the win, and if he or she has achieved a position that is extremely favorable for him or her, then this person should be able to win without question.
As impolite as it may seem to some people for opponents to continue on in lost situations, none of us should complain about it, because it is not a violation of the rules in anyway.
TT
I´m a pozzer...(1300 + ) and I play all the games.
Not just to lose time.
I really learn in that kind of situation. And ít´s not bad sportmanship.
As long as you stay attached to the rules....
resigning, on the other hand is neclecting your oponent to mate you,,,,that should be bad sportmanship
Two days ago on another site, two different opponents asked whether I would prefer that they resign, or whether I wanted to play it out to checkmate. I'd never faced this question before, but it serves to illustrate a widespread belief that I hear from school children regularly: resigning deprives people of the pleasure of checkmate.
Among serious and accomplished players, it is a breach of etiquette to play on when the position is clearly lost. Among beginners, the sense of proper manners is sometimes the reverse.
If you know that your position offers no hope of a draw, let alone victory for you, you should resign. If your opponent plays on in such a situation, you must be patient. Use it as an opportunity to hone your technique.
If an opponent displays poor sportsmanship, refuse all requests for a rematch.
I often resign later than might be expected because I play until I know that I could beat Topalov (or Fritz) from my opponent's position. I haven't played Topalov, but I practice "won" positions against Fritz.
Originally posted by WulebgrAmong serious and accomplished players, it is a breach of etiquette to play on when the position is clearly lost. Among beginners, the sense of proper manners is sometimes the reverse.
Two days ago on another site, two different opponents asked whether I would prefer that they resign, or whether I wanted to play it out to checkmate. I'd never faced this question before, but it serves to illustrate a widespread belief that I hear from school children regularly: resigning deprives people of the pleasure of checkmate.
Among serious and acc ...[text shortened]... pponent's position. I haven't played Topalov, but I practice "won" positions against Fritz.
This is how I feel about it. Couldn't have put it better then Wulebgr
Hey Wulebgr, not trying to be rude or anything but hint, hint 🙂
I personally never give up..
I play a lot of cricket and I believe a person should never ever ever give up....if you know cricket, I would say even if you need 10 runs from 1 ball to win, go for a six and hope that the bowler bowls a no ball instead of giving up the match...
I believe a person has all the rights to continue a match, who says resigning is a great thing to do????????? I believe great players never give up, especially in cricket if not in chess, even if grand masters resign, I don't believe its a great gesture to resign
