[COMMENT DELETED]

Endgame practise..your not gonna lose anything.nore are you gonna win anything.

If I had 2 cents for every time somebody's brought this up...

Resign when you know you cannot win or draw, except when playing a team match. In a team match if your opponent blunders stalemate or fails to win a won position it could be the difference between your team winning or losing. So especially at lower levels in team play I usually don't resign until it is at least obvious my opponent knows how to checkmate me. Obviously GM's will still resign earlier though.

Hey AndyClifton I am also wondering about this. And my search for "When to resign" brought me directly here. However, I'd like to be able to refere my opponents who I think should resign to a somewhat "official" text. They should not have the feeling, I would "trick" then into resigning. So, if you have stumbled over the topic so often, could you give a good reference? txs

If I get in a K vs K + Q endgame I won't resign. I want to see HOW he checkmates me. If he doesn't do it in the most efficient way Rybka-style then I'll have a moral victory.

It took someone 43 moves to checkmate me K+R v K. It was drawn if I had played accurately (assuming he played as poorly as he did), as I made a few mistakes to speed up his mate at the end. Imagine if I had resigned a game where my opponent might draw that.

what I mean, if you are in a position that cannot be won - even with a (one) blunder from the opponent - the only thing you can do, on the loser side, is to prolong the game. This is neither fun, nor is it the right capability to train. On the winner side, it's also not much fun. You just go ahead with the pawns or exchange further pieces. The only challange you can give yourself is to see how to win the games with the least possible moves. But also this is not exactly the right capability to train, imho. Surely, I speak about situations, where the outcome is clear let's say with 95% certainty. I don't want to play 19 futile games to the end, to win the one in the remaining 5%. I think, you can calculate the 95% from the relation between the ratings and the difference in material (also considering roughly the position). E.g. when we play with my rating (1500) and I am 7 pawn-points ahead, I know (with more than the 95%) that I will win the game. If the players rate are higher, 3 pawn points will suffice easily.

Andy would be a lot more financially sound than he currently is. 

Place them in checkmate. This will end the game. Seriously though no one should resign until they reach exceptional level. If theres 1% chance of victory or draw do it.

i would say, with regards to <1600 players it may be worth carrying on from what looks like a lost position, because of the less experience of the high rated players, there's a chance their opponent may make a mistake. And of course they may not know the position is lost

But for higher rated players >1800, they know or should know when a game is lost or drawn, they should show respect to their opponent/s, admit to themselves they have been outplayed and resign or accept the draw offer from clearly drawn positions.

Most of my opponents are >1900 and if my position looks lost, I resign immediately or offer a draw from obvious drawn positions, but i've played a few who don't show the same respect and just drag the game out or time out, which is quite childish, but the conditional moves come in very handy for people like this

Thats pretty much my same opinion Ronboy. Well stated. There are situations that warrant regining i.e. holding up a tourny on lost position in a meaningless game. But if that is the case no big deal it is what it is. How about the players who resign one move from mate? This irritates me just as much. Its smug. If i ever attain a high level ill probably resign more til then I'll fight it out and learn. Its amazing how close chess and arrogance go hand and hand.

k. vs. k.and r. is never a draw(without pawns on board),Q/k. vs. k. is such a basic win that if u consider playing these types of ending your best bet is to stop playing games and work on end game technique. good luck 

Yeah, couldn't agree with you more on chess and arrogance, Randy. I actually find it is worse in the speed chess. You really do get some right idiots and assholes in that game. I've lost count of the number of players who just let the clock run out or disconnect rather than resign in speed chess.

You also get the ones who message sad, sacastic comments when they are winning, things like, 'you're not very good are you', I'm to good for you etc, quite childish.

But on a number of occasions it has backfired on them and they've been beaten. I've played a few guys like this, but a lot of them always disconnect when they get beat before I can get my 'hahaha' in, quite childish of me to really, but i think it would make them think twice before being assholes in the future.

 

Once I had an endgame with a 1800+ player where he had only a pawn on the A file and a bishop of the wrong colour (and my King would clearly make it in time to the corner). I offered a draw and he refused LOL. It took like 10 moves for him to understand that there was nothing to do.

 

But then again, it depends what you consider a "lost position".

For example OTB if it's a rook ending and he reaches the Lucena I would not resign unless he's a titled player. There are a couple of tricks you can do, so you might have a chance. Exploiting his time pressure/tiredness is part of the game, it's not disrespect.

There is a huge difference in resigning in blitz and correspondance chess. I never resign in blitz chess because although I might have a losing position, I can attempt for a win on time. This might seem underhanded but it is still a legitiment way to win a blitz game seeing how time pressure causes players to make mistakes.

There is nothing in the slightest underhanded in seeking to win, or draw, on time.

Playing on in a hopeless position in a longer time limit game is a little bad mannered but only a little.

I don't really understand why it causes irritation. Set yourself to complete the win in the safest, quickest or most elegant way and there will still be a measure of challenge in the game.  And if your opponent is hoping to learn something from the technique you show in finihing the job that is really quite flattering.

It is not in the beginning of any great matter but in the continuing of the same until it be thoroughly finished where lyeth the true glory.

Yeah, qiute understand what you're saying about speed chess,Practicingkid, I should have clarified better, the situation of not resigning in speed has been, with me anyway, is, my opponents were one two moves from being checkmated.

but yes, I do understand the time factor involved, so in most cases it is worth carrying on. And otb is different with, like you say time constraints,tiredness etc. But with online chess you have a huge amount of time to analyse the situation,  so I still believe it is being disrepectful not resigning from lost positions in online chess, but point taken, otb is different

I don't resign until the next move is mate... as taught to me per my instructor after all, how do you know they have an end game?!!

What?  That's the worst thing to do! If they have mate next move allow them to finish the game.

There's nothing worse than playing 20-30 needless moves only for your opponent to resign the move before mate.

Either resign promptly or allow your opponent the mate.