Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Tournaments Forum

Tournaments Forum

  1. Standard member sbacat
    Eddie's Dad
    06 Jun '09 21:07
    Just curious what your normal reaction is when your opponent whines during a game. During Game 6377162 (now over) my opponent whined that I should resign my position because he was materially ahead. I relented.

    Is it considered the gentlemanly thing to do to surrender or should I have stuck it out and fought for the draw? Your opinions, please.
  2. 06 Jun '09 21:54
    My opinion on this - you should resign when you are sure your opponent is going to beat you. This means, in my opinion, lower rated players may want to play things out a little more than higher rated players (because you're not really sure) and you might play on against a lower-rated opponent (becuase you never know what might happen). You resign when you are comfortable, not because your opponent wants you to.

    Having said that, you're pretty much finished in the above game. Although, I might have been tempted to answer something like "Why not play on to mate? It shouldn't be long now"
  3. Standard member sbacat
    Eddie's Dad
    06 Jun '09 22:09
    Originally posted by Erekose

    Having said that, you're pretty much finished in the above game. Although, I might have been tempted to answer something like "Why not play on to mate? It shouldn't be long now"
    When I first started playing on here, I'd fight to the last scrap and never resign. There's a school of thought that suggests any resignation is cowardly regardless of the material or position advantage of the opponent. But lately, the games all seem rather disposable in nature. Perhaps that's the onset of burnout or at least numbness to the volume.

    Perhaps I've just stood in line at the banquet too long. Thanks for sharing your perspective. Next time, depending on my frame of mind, I'd be tempted to say, you play your game and I'll play mine...
  4. 06 Jun '09 22:16
    One other bit of perspective - I almost never mind when an opponent wants to play it out all the way. I'm quite sympathetic to the idea that resiging feels like quitting sometimes. The only time I mind is when players start to slow play me when they are losing. This almost never happens and most players actual speed up when the end is near.
  5. Standard member Blackamp
    Death
    06 Jun '09 23:27 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by sbacat
    Just curious what your normal reaction is when your opponent whines during a game. During Game 6377162 (now over) my opponent whined that I should resign my position because he was materially ahead. I relented.

    Is it considered the gentlemanly thing to do to surrender or should I have stuck it out and fought for the draw? Your opinions, please.
    it's never happened to me, but if it did, i'd be tempted to PM back "little less whining, little more winning'.

    but seriously, i'm no masochist - if my last tactic, try for stalemate or perpetual, attempted swindle has gone, i just resign and get it over with.

    i usually feel a bit relieved, like a bank finally getting some of its bad debt off its books by writing it off.
  6. Subscriber Kewpie
    since 1-Feb-07
    07 Jun '09 03:20
    Originally posted by sbacat

    Perhaps I've just stood in line at the banquet too long. Thanks for sharing your perspective. Next time, depending on my frame of mind, I'd be tempted to say, you play your game and I'll play mine...
    Maybe you'll get an opportunity to say it yet, there's a chance you'll get him again in the next round of that tournament since you've both progressed.
  7. Standard member Blackamp
    Death
    07 Jun '09 03:44
    Originally posted by sbacat
    There's a school of thought that suggests any resignation is cowardly regardless of the material or position advantage of the opponent.
    That's the kind of thinking that had Japanese soldiers hiding out in caves on Okinawa ten years after the end of WW2
  8. Standard member atticus2
    Frustrate the Bad
    07 Jun '09 09:08
    Whining is one thing; resigning is another. A resignation is an act of courtesy to one's opponent. In fact, it is merely an offer to resign which an opponent can, at least in law, refuse. In practical terms this never, or very rarely, happens. So a resignation ends the game.

    It is widely regarded as a discourtesy, even an insult, to play on beyond the point where, by reasonable means (ie moves) from the opponent in question, you will lose. The relative strength of one's opponent is an important factor in making a judgment on when that point has been reached.
  9. 07 Jun '09 10:36
    Originally posted by atticus2
    It is widely regarded as a discourtesy, even an insult, to play on beyond the point where, by reasonable means (ie moves) from the opponent in question, you will lose. The relative strength of one's opponent is an important factor in making a judgment on when that point has been reached.
    I'd agree with that. It is discourteous to play on in a lost position.

    However, so is asking your opponent to resign - you are throwing his judgement into question.

    Depending on the day, I might play on to the bitter end and add the opponent to my censor list, or I might reply that I had intended to play on for a few more moves, and still intend to do so.

    A third reply might be that the mobility of your pieces more than makes up for the material, so he is free resign if he wants the game to end.
    In an over-the-board tournament, my opponent offered a draw quite early. I could not see a good reason, but he was a stronger player, so I accepted. He told me afterwards that his car was badly parked, and he needed to move it. I always wondered would would have happened if I had played on ...
  10. 07 Jun '09 11:19
    I think on here the chances of a swindle in a losing position are too negligible to be worth considering against a strong opponent. I often play on to mate, however, as a helpful guide to lower rated players who might want to use my games as a learning method. I have seen games resigned when I am not eaxactly clear as to where the winning blow will come from and would have liked to have seen a little more play. Plus, also, there is a satisfaction to getting a checkmate from a nice combination which I feel is stolen away by an opponents premature resigning.

    So there are a few arguements in favour of playing on - if somebody tells me I should resign I will always play it out to the bitter end as it is just as much of an insult for them to be telling me that there is no chance that I could possibly beat them as it is for me to be making them prove it. It happens in blitz quite frequently and some people really go beserk about it, especially when they end up blundering a winning position while expecting a resignation.
  11. Standard member sbacat
    Eddie's Dad
    07 Jun '09 13:31
    Originally posted by Tyrannosauruschex
    ...if somebody tells me I should resign I will always play it out to the bitter end as it is just as much of an insult for them to be telling me that there is no chance that I could possibly beat them as it is for me to be making them prove it. It happens in blitz quite frequently and some people really go beserk about it, especially when they end up blundering a winning position while expecting a resignation.
    Now that would be entertaining. To have somebody tell you that your position was lost only to soldier on and either win or at least force a draw. That would have your opponent talking to themselves for certain.

    Thanks for the chuckle!

    Steve
  12. Standard member atticus2
    Frustrate the Bad
    07 Jun '09 14:45
    I can't see the sense, under normal conditions, in drawing out a game that is clearly lost. People who play on in this manner do so out of spite or ignorance.

    If out of spite, however much merited by an opponent's comments or conduct, the 'gains' to the loser in terms of satisfaction are pretty small. I speak of what I know Early on in here, I made the error in a pair of 7/14 tournament games of suggesting my opponent resign two utterly hopeless positions. My motives were rational; my suggestion politely put - we were holding up tournament progress; and surely we could both be doing better things. To no avail. I received no reply. But my opponent then dawdled his way to the bitter end several weeks later. I've learned to keep my mouth shut after that!

    Far more common is an absence of resignation due to ignorance. This probably stems from lack of familiarity with, or concern for, basic chess etiquette. I find weaker players rarely resign. One only need scan the final positions on the RHP homepage to see that some guys will play on long after the farm's been sold and the wife's run off with the bank manager A resignation avoids unnecessary humiliation - it's an act of courage, even dignity, but never cowardice.

    So when the game's up, resign and move on. Life's too short to t*t about making gestures, or hoping that some miracle will rescue you. If the other guy's good enough to be well ahead, he's good enough to finish the job. Proof won't alter that
  13. 07 Jun '09 15:40
    Just not too early... I have seen it taken to extremes on fics, I had a guy resign because he blundered a pawn by moving too quickly and not recapturing recently - there is nothing you can learn about the game by giving in the moment the going gets tough.
  14. Standard member sbacat
    Eddie's Dad
    07 Jun '09 15:53
    Is this a proper example of a game I should have resigned as hopeless?

    Game 6154535

    I had no reasonable expectation of a win, but...
  15. 07 Jun '09 17:20
    I would have been raging if I had lost that as white but, yes, it is a great example of a 'resignable' position still having enough life in it to wb worth continuing.