Why Don't They Resign?

Originally posted by dubnikova
Often I see playes here on this site, and in live games (New York parks, Greenwich Village clubs...) play to the bitter end, even where they have no chance to draw let alone win. I consider this an unsportsman like behavior.

What do you think?

I think it's actually kind of fun playing a game you know you can't lose. It takes the pressure off and you can just savor your victory, little by little. I don't really mind it because i know that of course there is always that chance of a stalemate or a mistake that could turn the tide. And if I were in their shoes maybe I would do the same thing. Sometimes i will play on even when down a piece especially if we are playing blitz. If i am way down though like a queen, than i will probably resign. Unless I see that there is an opening for a possible checkmate in the future. Let's say that I'm down by 10 points but I have a forced checkmate and it is my turn to move. Even though they are ahead in material, I am the one with the advantage.

Originally posted by chessmasterBG
Even when im almost certain to lose i dont like to resign i like to play it out i dont know maybe its just me because i am unexperienced

when im in a definate winning position i would prefer my oppononet not to resign to gain more experience in endgames and mates nd stuff

I don't think playing an endgame in a vastly superior position is very good practise.

If I have a winning position, I prefer that the opponent play until the bitter end, simply because I get more satisfaction from an administered checkmate than a resignation.

If I am in a losing position, I always play until the bitter end, because it's always possible that the opponent could throw the game.

I will resign completely lost positions, but will not if my opponent still has to prove that he can win. You never know what will happen in a game. For example, I just got a timeout win in a lost position.

Game 5714987

I hadn't resigned yet because, although my position was lost, he still had to find the correct moves to convert it. Materially, I was down only the exchange and so I wanted to make him "prove" that he knew how to convert the advantage.

I was planning to resign as soon as he moved his rook to the g file, as I could not defend the h pawn and I calculated that I could not queen my a or b pawns before his h pawn queens.

So, all he had to do was play Rg6 any of the last few moves and I'd resign; and he didn't and timed out instead.

Am I "proud" of that win? No. In my mind, I know I "really" lost the game. But that's the game. Sometimes you get good breaks and sometimes your mouse slips or you get confused which game you're playing and inadvertently blunder. If I ever lose to an engine (amazingly, I truly don't think I've ever played against an engine on RHP yet), I'll consider it payback for timing out a game I should have lost.

You didn't 'lose' the game in any sense of the word. If anything, you played correctly, realising that those few extra seconds were worth more than a slightly stronger position.

Originally posted by lepustimidus
If I have a winning position, I prefer that the opponent play until the bitter end, simply because I get more satisfaction from an administered checkmate than a resignation.

If I am in a losing position, I always play until the bitter end, because it's always possible that the opponent could throw the game.

ditto

Originally posted by dubnikova
Often I see playes here on this site, and in live games (New York parks, Greenwich Village clubs...) play to the bitter end, even where they have no chance to draw let alone win. I consider this an unsportsman like behavior.

What do you think?

if i think there is a chance that i can get a draw in a tournament or clan game then i am going to stay till the bitter end

in my opinion it is down to your opponent to put you in checkmate.

I have a couple of games where i have been fortunate to get a draw where others would have resigned

i think i'm slowly getting there, generally improving...

my score is up and down - quite a lot

as important as the openings are, it was my initial downfall here early on in my games when i started at this site

i have found standardised starts that i love and enjoy, some are just bloody difficult, and i really like the thematic tournaments

midgames i still find difficult

but i still get surprised when geometry steps in and creates wonderful positioning to enable stepwise confinement, or otherwise develops into a barricade or isolation of my opponent..

unfortunately i play far to ambitiously, and am a little cavalier

i lose to 1800's and 1200's, sometimes because of a slip of the mouse, sometimes a hasty redirection of intent at quite the wrong time, but i tend not to resign.....

i am currently playing out a lost game, as my opponent has this very bad attitude, took something like 200 days against my 30 days of play and as i play too quickly and too many games at once - made a blunder

he asked me to resign, and did so very rudely

i will endeavour to play for a timeout

it is actually for revenge

this site has turned me into a monster....

but i feel there is quite a lot to learn from your endgames

one of my recent games i was losing, then winning, then a draw

subscribe, if players aren't playing fast enough for you

play more games

resign if you wish - but don't force others to

especially not in correspondence chess

isn't this a game after all... ?

i snuck into the 1600's, am probably more comfortable in the 1500's, but will stubbornly play to the end as my father taught me - some habits die a little hard

apologies for having written so much

-i'm waiting for someone to move......

I have no problem resigning when it is inevitable, but I have caught less experienced players making mistakes and therefor losing the game. What I extremely hate is and individual making remarks during a game with a smiley face, then asking you to hurry up and play or to go ahead and resign because they're going to win anyway. I would not do that to anyone so I will wait for that particularly rude individual to make my moves. It's a gentleman's game, act like one.

In this game my opponent blundered and allowed a stalemate.

As a rookie there are times when I'll play the game out even though defeat is all but certain.

I'm still learning the game and I can learn from my opponent.

Each to their own. If someone want's to play it out against me, then fine - I need the practice!

This might be a different issue for better ranked players though

I'd like to disagree with quite a few people here. I believe that playing to any ending is okay, but not necessary. Sometimes I like to just go "What the heck? It's good practice" And as always, in almost in tournament play or any other game for that matter you'll have a chance to grab that win back, you just have to wait and find it.

As for the, dally while your losing. I'll prolong lost games, but it's not because just not losing for another 5 minutes, but rather, all the games I'm almost surely to lose, are the games I like to analyze and do my best. On the winning games, it's a lot easier to just move, because there is less pressure.

In a skittle I had King and Rook vs. King,
and my opponent played until he was mated.
(Yes, I was able to mate.) Then, a few days later, a different opponent played to the bitter end when I had K and Q vs. K! My feeling is that if someone wants to play until he's mated, that's his privilege.

Some players grumble when their opponent doesn't resign quickly enough to suit them -- "Don't you ever resign?" -- that sort of thing. In the above mentioned games I didn't complain; I just went ahead and showed my opponents that I really knew how to execute elementary mates. Maybe they were such poor players that they didn't realize that you don't have to be a Capablanca to win endgames like those.