Premature Resignation

I am ashamed to say that I just might suffer from this most embarrassing affliction. When I blunder away material (3 or more points worth) in a game (which happens far more than I would like), I try to consolidate my position and see if I can start fighting back aggressively. Any time I have taken a passive role at this point, my opponent's extra material decides things quickly.

During this aggressive counter, I sometimes force a blunder on my opponent and the game fights on. Many times, however, my opponent is more than skilled enough to weather the storm and force an even greater material advantage for themselves. At this point, when I realize the only way for me to win (or even draw) is if my opponent gets very stupid, I resign.

I have been reading some posts in other forums that take the position that resigning is only really appropriate in tournament play when it is the gentleman thing to do when you have a forced loss. At any other time, you should fight to the last pawn and make your opponent prove they have the skills to finish the job.

I can sort of see this point of view in that I remember a game where I got the material advantage and eventually played it down to my having a bishop and a knight versus my opponent's lone king. This was a won game except for the fact that this particular ending is tough to navigate unless you know the specific move sequence. I didn't; I had to offer the draw. If my opponent would have resigned when I had the 6 point material advantage to begin with, he would have been handing me a victory I couldn't truly earn on my own. Instead he fought me to a standstill by never giving up.

However, that's not how I was taught to play. I was told that when the material advantage reaches a point where the only way to lose or draw is by my opponent's blatant stupidity (like mine in the example I gave), it is insulting not to resign.

What are your thoughts on this?

--SmittyG

I believe to play in a 'gentleman' like way one should resign a lost position. However, when is a losing position a lost position? I simply look at the board and judge the strength of my opponent and his ability to finish the game. Games where I make silly blunders losing material, I continue until my opponent prooves to me that he has a plan to finish the game and is executing it correctly. For inspiration check this game out. Some people would have resigned in my position yet I was able to graft out a victory through very good recovary play waiting for my oppenent to lose his concentration thus his pieces and hopefully the game. Here it is: http://www.redhotpawn.com/core/playchess.php?gameid=254118
😀

Originally posted by SmittyG
I can sort of see this point of view in that I remember a game where I got the material advantage and eventually played it down to my having a bishop and a knight versus my opponent's lone king. This was a won game except for the fact that ...[text shortened]... r giving up.


What are your thoughts on this?

--SmittyG

I do believe that is incorrect my friend. You can mate with knight and bishop, but it could take a very long set of moves depending on where the pieces are! 😀

Tim, I wish you were correct. In fact, at the time, I believed it too. But I have since researched it and had my computer play it out; it is a win. I still don't know how to do it, however.

--SmittyG

It's a win!But,in the worst case scenario,it takes about 34 moves(give or take a few),and one slip means you will not make it within the 50 move limit.In a 'live' game I would continue play and let him/her prove he/she knows how to do it.In corr chess however I would resign,'cause everyone can search the net to see how it's done.

Originally posted by SmittyG
I am ashamed to say that I just might suffer from this most embarrassing affliction. When I blunder away material (3 or more points worth) in a game (which happens far more than I would like), I try to consolidate my position and see if I can start fighting back aggressively. Any time I have taken a passive role at this point, my opponent's extra material d ...[text shortened]... mple I gave), it is insulting not to resign.

What are your thoughts on this?

--SmittyG

Originally posted by SmittyG
Tim, I wish you were correct. In fact, at the time, I believed it too. But I have since researched it and had my computer play it out; it is a win. I still don't know how to do it, however.

--SmittyG

Originally posted by Hentschel
I believe to play in a 'gentleman' like way one should resign a lost position. However, when is a losing position a lost position? I simply look at the board and judge the strength of my opponent and his ability to finish the game. Games where I make silly blunders losing material, I continue until my opponent prooves to me that he has a plan to finis ...[text shortened]... hopefully the game. Here it is: http://www.redhotpawn.com/core/playchess.php?gameid=254118
😀