8191 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
Is it rude not to resign when down a queen or other hugely losing material, or a lost position, when under relatively fast time controls? Many 3 and 5 minute games I have refused to resign and have even won a few of those games.
Second point on time control. A few times, I don't know for sure that it was this site, my opponent accused me of shorting their time. Is this possible?
I don't want to be rude or disrespectful, so any admin help on points of etiquette are appreciated.
General rule of thumb: Do what you want, don't worry about what others think.
If you aren't deliberately trying to annoy someone or waste someone's time it's fine IMO.
you have every right to play out your game
When I said waste their time I meant with no chance of winning. Running down their clock in speed chess is part of the game.
I agree with Scott, esp. with fast games. Feel free to play it out and learn from it. You might even turn things around and draw or win. If you are capable of making some blunders, so are your opponents. If you are way behind on material and truely appear to be outplayed, resigning is fine but still not required.
not resigning isnt bad, in fact its recommended by most strong players
Pinky up while castling
They only do it if they know their opponent is capable of winning the position though, so their is no point of resigning. The game isn't over till its over.
Resigning is silly unless it's a clear loss scenario.. when I play if I'm paired 'end game' against a rook / king and I see the rook pin me to a file and he starts to move the king out, I clearly know he understands that end game and I can't win so I dont waste his time. (assuming I have nothing to fight back with that is.)
The topic has been brought up many times before, although I'm not sure if an admin has ever weighed in with his or her opinion. Has any authority such as a National Tournament director ever actually published anything on chess etiquette?
This is only my opinion, as someone who has played in tournaments for over 35 years: I always beleived it was appropriate to resign when I lost a piece, even when playingat 1250 USCF. This is what all happens in 99% of the games published in Chess LIFE , regardless of rating.
Apparently, this is no longer the case, and there are many who see nothing wrong in playing on a rook or queen down.
I don't remember who told me and it is certainly just an opinion but I resign when I am in a position that I beleive a 1300 uscf could beat a 2200 uscf
I have played out games when I was clearly going to lose because I am trying to learn more about the end game. I watch what other players do to see if I can pick up any end game pointers. A couple of times I have been called names for doing it but I don't do it to be rude or annoying. I am just trying to learn.
Thanks for the feedback on the topic. I have been berated by opponents when hanging on in 3 and 5 minute games, especially when the opponent lost!
Has it ever been possible to short your opponents time--i.e. you have power to somehow cut your opponent's time down? I have been accused of doing that.
no thats lag
i agree w/ the consensus that you have the right to play out any game-even when my opponent is playing a king vs. 3 queens, i just politely keep playing- no need to be rude
as for time- i have heard that problem before, but i think its just a glitch in time lag and frankly i think its ignorant for someone to accuse you ( or anybody) of hackery and witchcraft- i mean really? if you could manipulate time, couldn't you find a better use for it? just saying
That's ridiculous in my opinion. Against a minor piece I'd be confident of at least holding a draw, simply because I've never lost through going a minor piece down and my opponent converting it in the endgame.
Not resigning isn't rude. Refusing to resign just to let your time run down to make the opponent wait to win is rude, though.
If YOU are giving up on winning or drawing the game, you should resign. If you want to fight on, it's your right and duty, and not at all discourteous as long as you continue to fight and play the game normally. Just using up your time to annoy the opponent is rather poor sportsmanship.
Bottom line: if you would be upset if someone did it to you, don't do it to others.
resigning is not rude
Everyone has their story. Mine is, this guy had no chess ettiquete at tall.
It was a standard 30minute game. Were down to RK vs his RK That was it. He kept checking and I just moved my rook around to block him. This went on for 30-40 moves. Then my clock ran out and he claimed the win. What a bastard.
Nothing wrong with that IMO, good strategy, you should have tried to force move repetition.
Should Players Below 1500 Play Hypermodern Openings?
by TitanCG a few minutes ago
6/18/2013 - Tal-Starodub, Petrozavodsk 1984
by artita a few minutes ago
Chess experiment: How much does three pints of beer impact your chess ability?
by Haiku575 5 minutes ago
Open declaration about Account sharing.
by GreenCastleBlock 6 minutes ago
Strategy in Chess Games
by Remellion 14 minutes ago
Probably Tactics trainer is going to be changed
by billyblatt 14 minutes ago
What's your playing style?
by Grinmaster 22 minutes ago
by ConnorMacleod_151 23 minutes ago
No more multiple games for Standard members?
by Phylar 23 minutes ago
by Ladya79 26 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2013 Chess.com