Resigning

I'm just wondering what the 'unwritten law' on this site is about resigning. I know that at the top levels of OTB chess, it's often considered impolite to not resign after losing a major (or sometimes minor) piece en prise. I know we're not as good as these players, and that there's a possibility for drawing, further blunders that get us back, cheap timeouts, etc... but because this is correspondence chess (a type of chess that really shouldn't have blunders (but that's another story)) should we be resigning immediately after we 'really blow it'?

Game 1427230

Why not make 'em prove they can finish it?

1939 stalin thought he could conquer finland in three weeks. soviet union sent 1 000 000 men, 3000 tanks, 3800 planes against finland's 250 000 men, 30 tanks, 130 planes. they never got through.

material isn't everything.

Originally posted by wormwood
...material isn't everything...

Anderssen vs Kieseritsky 1851 (The Immortal Game) springs to mind as the perfect example of active pieces outweighing a material deficit.

Originally posted by leisurelysloth
Game 1427230

Why not make 'em prove they can finish it?

It might upset your opponent if you don't resign, but if you think you have a chance keep going and you're learning all the time anyway.

Originally posted by excalibur 8
It might upset your opponent if you don't resign, ...

"chess is not for timid souls"
-steinitz

The king sacrifice, unique amongst all sacrifices, universally fails.

If I don't think I'm going to be able to handle the material loss I'll resign. If I'm down a couple of pawns or maybe a bishop or knight then play on.

Originally posted by ih8sens
[b]I'm just wondering what the 'unwritten law' on this site is about resigning.

The rules here are the same as those of the FIDE "Laws of Chess" : -
see http://fide.com/official/handbook.asp?level=EE1
" Article 5.1b : The game is won by the player whose opponent declares he resigns. This immediately ends the game."

i.e. a player resigns if and when he/she/it/they want to.

In the thread ''when do you properly resign ?' I suggested in my post of 30 Dec '06 15:31. that : -
"You resign in the following circumstances : -
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."

Originally posted by ih8sens
I'm just wondering what the 'unwritten law' on this site is about resigning. I know that at the top levels of OTB chess, it's often considered impolite to not resign after losing a major (or sometimes minor) piece en prise. I know we're not as good as these players, and that there's a possibility for drawing, further blunders that get us back, cheap timeou ...[text shortened]... t that's another story)) should we be resigning immediately after we 'really blow it'?

I consider it rude if my opponent doesn't resign a lost game. I hate losing as much as the next guy, but I'd much rather resign than dance around the board hoping my opponent will make a stupid mistake.

I consider it rude if my opponent tells me it is rude of me not to resign.

The only time I get bothered about my opponent not resigning is in a clearly lost engame that forces me to play another 15 moves to get what is most definitely going to be a win.

I guess I haven't played enough games to be bothered by it. I sort of enjoy playing it out. A win is a win.

Originally posted by Falco Lombardi
I consider it rude if my opponent doesn't resign a lost game. I hate losing as much as the next guy, but I'd much rather resign than dance around the board hoping my opponent will make a stupid mistake.

I agree but as mentioned in the next post I would never tell an opponent to resign. I would just go ahead and win the game.

Although some cheeky RHP person (who shall remain nameless) was rude enough to offer me a draw in a lost position!!!!!