I don't usually ask my opponent to resign a game, but when they have absolutely no chance of winning or drawing and they don't is it inappropriate to aske them to resign. Here is a link to the game I am referring to. Game 1671169 I asked him to resign after he lost his rook leaving him with only a king that could only move on the A file and couldn't capture anything. He could only move up and down between A1 and A5. I had a rook, a bishop, two pawns and a king. I won the game, but he refused to resign, so we had to drag it out to it's obvious conclusion.
Originally posted by CliffLandinIt's unfortunate when that happens, but there's really very little you can do. Playing on in clearly lost positions may be a breach of etiquette, but it is even more so to come out and ask your opponenet to resign. The best you can do is make a note never to play him again. If it was a clan game, perhaps bring it to the attention of your clan leader, and see if he'll discuss it with the other player's clan leader. Most reputable clan leaders don't want to be associated with players who thumb their nose at the rules of general conduct of the game.
I don't usually ask my opponent to resign a game, but when they have absolutely no chance of winning or drawing and they don't is it inappropriate to aske them to resign. Here is a link to the game I am referring to. Game 1671169 I asked him to resign after he lost his rook leaving him with only a king that could only move on the A file and couldn' ...[text shortened]... won the game, but he refused to resign, so we had to drag it out to it's obvious conclusion.
They may have been hoping for a stalemate. Some people have an aversion to resigning, it's only really a problem if they start dragging the game out by using all their timeout and timebank allowance in the hope that you'll get bored and offer a draw or something. Generally it's counterproductive to ask people to resign as they may react in a fairly contrary fashion and really start playing slowly as well.
Originally posted by DeepThoughtIf you can force mate then send him the move plan and let him see how close to being over the game really is. Otherwise you ain't won yet and your opponent does have the right to play it out in the hope of a blunder or 4. IF you are good enough you will win BUT blunders can happen, even from the higher ranked players.
They may have been hoping for a stalemate. Some people have an aversion to resigning, it's only really a problem if they start dragging the game out by using all their timeout and timebank allowance in the hope that you'll get bored and offer a draw or something. Generally it's counterproductive to ask people to resign as they may react in a fairly contrary fashion and really start playing slowly as well.
Personally I tend to just give it up when I can see I'm def screwed so I can start another game but your opponent does have the right make his last stand if he so wishes.
Originally posted by MCAI actually did tell him exactly how I was going to achieve mate, but he still dragged it out.
If you can force mate then send him the move plan and let him see how close to being over the game really is. Otherwise you ain't won yet and your opponent does have the right to play it out in the hope of a blunder or 4. IF you are good enough you will win BUT blunders can happen, even from the higher ranked players.
Personally I tend to just give it up when ...[text shortened]... start another game but your opponent does have the right make his last stand if he so wishes.
resignation is an option for the losing player to take, when and if he so chooses. it's not something the winning player has the right to demand. if I can't force the game to a win, then I clearly haven't won it yet, right? asking the opponent to resign is like asking them to do your work for you.
and if the opponent using all his time annoys you, the time you both have agreed upon starting the game, then maybe correspondance chess just isn't for you. or chess with any time controls.
Originally posted by Natural ScienceI agree. Indeed, asking an opponent to resign is a far worse breach of etiquette than playing on in a lost position (especially when one's opponent has squandered as many tactical opportunities as the eventual winner did here--everything from missing the win of a queen on move 11 to missing a mate in one near the end.)
Playing on in clearly lost positions may be a breach of etiquette, but it is even more so to come out and ask your opponenet to resign.
Originally posted by WulebgrI'm only surprised that stalemate wasn't the final result.
(especially when one's opponent has squandered as many tactical opportunities as the eventual winner did here--everything from missing the win of a queen on move 11 to missing a mate in one near the end.)
Originally posted by BowmannI am not claiming to be a great player, but am I to understand that if you were in this situation you would not have resigned? You would have moved up and down with no chance to move off of the A (file?) hoping for a catastrophic mistake?
I'm only surprised that stalemate wasn't the final result.
Originally posted by WulebgrI have never claimed to be a good chess player and my rating proves this, but I still can't see how I missed winning a queen on move 11. Can you please elaborate.
I agree. Indeed, asking an opponent to resign is a far worse breach of etiquette than playing on in a lost position (especially when one's opponent has squandered as many tactical opportunities as the eventual winner did here--everything from missing the win of a queen on move 11 to missing a mate in one near the end.)