I think you're going to need to show your work on that one -- it doesn't add up.

[Edit:  Nevermind -- I see that you've twisted the comparison between not resigning and resigning into a comparison between not-resigning and playing fast and not-resigning and playing slow.  That's great, but it's not relevant.

The original point was that there are two types of non-resigners.  Those who don't know that they are in a lost position and those who do.  I feel that the first is excusable, but that the second is not.  The problem is that it's near impossible to tell which you are dealing with which is why the indicators of taking the maximum time as soon as the game is clearly lost and resigning just before mate were cited as one way to tell that you are likely facing a member of the latter group.

At no point was I complaining specifically about slow players who use their allotted time as per the agreement made at the beginning of the game -- frankly, I am one.]

Why not write a message to the opponent and telling that you are going to resign and see what he / she will answer, at least he/she will know.

 I thing that is better then just resigning, for the other side ( not resigning ) it's like if somebody pull the rog under his/her feet, I don't think is nice to receive a notice ( the game is over due to resigning) I think is just right to do that.

King5678

---

Again the reason doen't matter, the time you use up for the game is the same.

I see your still dealing with your bizarre persecution by proxy disorder Suggo. I also see your attempt to set the record for the use of the phrase "impose your ideals" is still ongoing, kudos!

My advice to the rest of you is to simply let Suggo go on this one, or resign if you will.  I have attempted to do battle with this mental mammoth before without success. I am still in awe at the way he shrugs off logic and common sense.   

Read the post again Suggo.  The issue is resigning versus not resigning, not slow versus fast play.

I think we need to keep the environment unpolluted here. I'm already short of breath down here, I don't think I even know what I'm righting...

look I spelled 'writing' wrongly....a sure sign of pollution...

It's a compliment for someone to resign when the position is totally lost. I am always unhappy when a winning position is lost due to time constraints, it's OK though, nothing like being consoled with a box of donuts

This forum is still going? What are the rules regarding resignation? Do I have to resign according to the rules? Did I hear a faint no? EUREKA! I think I solved the equation:

r = rules

q = quit

m = material

a = opponent 1

b = opponent 2

If a*m is less than b*m or b*m is less than a*m then r must equal q. True/False

Let's see

If an opponent has less material than his/her opponent the rules state you must quit. FALSE

---

Let me know when you come up with some logic and common sense Lobster, I'd like to be able to shrug it off as it would be a new experience for both of us.  It will be the first time I have shrugged off common sense and logic, and it will be the first time you have come up with either!

---

He was talking about two types of non resigners, and specifically mentioning those who play extra slow out of spite once they realise they are lost.  What I was saying is that if you have to play the game out it takes you no more time in playing if he was to move every 2 mins or every 7 days.  This is all I was referring to in the above post!

---

 I am not going to speculate on the motives but I have personnally experienced the phenomena of my opponent playing at vastly different speeds depending on the position. As this opponent appears to use the same approach against other opponents, it follows that there is a method behind. Of course, it is within the rules but would you expect to see the same behavior when playing OTB? In all my years I have never experienced during club play that an opponent continued to play in a position with a rook against a queen plus bishop (or with a naked king against a rook and queen in another game) just because he has still time on his clock. It would be considered extremely rude and cause quite a ruckus. Of course, in Online Chess you can do something else while waiting for a response but it stinks to have to take vacation time because your opponent continues a game that has been over for 10 plus moves.

---

A game that is over can't be continued!

If you're too stupid to understand his point, don't post!

If you can understand his post, why post something pedantic and pointless!

---

LOL, generally people who feel threatened get angry like this!

I understand his post fine, but I am wondering if either of you understand that a game is not over if it is still being played!  Pedantic or not, it's a fact!

Not resigning when you're clearly lost is done out of fear of losing just as cheating. Some people play only for the win. That's just how it is...

---

Rude/unsporting behaviour...to play out a game is rude/unsporting behaviour?  To follow all the rules and complete a game because you would like to complete it for any myriad of reasons is rude/unsporting behaviour?  Sorry mate, you might consider it rude/unsporting behaviour, I think it is all part of the game and what you sign up for when you consent to play.  Rude/unsporting behaviour for me is pressuring and chiding others in an attempt to conform to what you consider correct...so in fact I do believe it is you that defends rude/unsporting behaviour!

I support people being allowed to make their own decisions as far as when and or if they are going to resign.  I am not a supporter of the never resign crowd, I am not a supporter of the resign crowd.  I really don't care which way anyone wants to play it.  Check out post #13, that's where I stand with this!

---

Oh Anthony, once again you think you know why everyone behaves in this way!  I know of a guy that once played out a game when he knew he had lost because he was curious to see how he could be checkmated with the pieces his opponent had left.....hmm, that pretty much debunks your it is only 'done out of fear of losing' claim.