11058 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!
Not all of it, it's a long thread. To summarise, I don't think it's unsportsmanlike not to resign, but yes it is to simply drag the time out. Clearly abandoning a game and making your opponent wait for the time to run out is very frustrating and definitely unsportsmanlike.
This really sums it all up!
The thing is, if white played g3, he could have tried for the stalemate trick as Qxg3?? is a draw
What game are you alking about?
The picture on the first post.
Here is the actual game:
Resigning is the best choice in the sample game. Well, if his opponent thinks he can still win, he's a cucko! And if he thinks he can draw either by insufficient material or stalemate, then he should play on and not let the clock run down!
What say we have a new perspective, because most seem too happy with their personal uprightness.
I'm NOT being religious, just using an example.
You die, you're standing in a very bright room, a voice says to you, "IF YOU HAVE SINNED, GO JUMP IN THAT HOLE OVER THERE" and points to a very dark hole.
Now, upon coming to an honest answer to that, you may understand better why some people don't WANT to jump in the hole. You can't see the bottom, it's dark and looks uncomfortable. Some will actually run away.
Or...here's a real life example. First time we were attacked by VC, two of our mechanics crouched down in a semi fetal position and were frozen. They couldn't have gotten up if you offered a million dollars to them.
What I'm suggesting is that FEAR of the unknown (the game is known, the loss is not) can, will, and does affect different people in different ways. So WHAT the guy walks off. Don't play them anymore. But your standing here now whining about how the "other guy" lost sounds like a flat tone bell made of sand stone.
In fact, is that not what this is, here? Guys standing around bragging about how bad they scared someone with their oh-so-powerful game?
Geez... get over it. Move on.
I recently was invited to play my first tourny here.My fellow mates was beating me like a drum.However I kept playing useing the experience as a learning curve.My puter went down and Im bedridden most days battling a illness.So in the end naturally I lost most of my matches also to time.By the way it was a no vacation deal.Once back online I sent a PM to the one who invited me apologizing.I think certain circumstances require certain acts.But to abandom when loseing is not very sportsmanlike leaving one hanging or vacation out.Jusy my take.
I'm curious about this flat tone bell made of sand stone.
I never understood playing on in this position:
I have a friend who is very new to chess and wanted me to show them the mate with the queen against the lone king. They kept stalemating me when I controlled the king. I know this might happen in the 500 - 800 range, but why do so many players around 1200 - 1400 range still act like they expect a stalemate?
I was stalemated by a 2100 once in KQK. Just once.
Last night I had to wait 10 minutes for a game to time out and no, it wasn't the end of the world, but it's still a super lame thing to do to someone basically out of spite because you're too much of a baby to just man up and resign. How anyone could defend this kind of behaviour is beyond me...
Yeah, stalemates can happen, and I even I saw an example of stalemate from a grandmaster game, but it wasn't from the KQK endgame, but it does show that even great players can miss it. Stalemating in the KQK seems like something a player rated around 1000 should be able to avoid, so this 2100 is quite a shock.
Resign or play on, but never abandon! Chess Etiquette 101!
So we're in agreement. Type "holy cow! a tornado is coming!" then abandon the game.
Of course! If you want to poo, that's an emergency!
Resignation is not unsportsmanlike. It is admitting defeat. However, to simply ignore the game is completely the opposite. It forces the winning player to wait to see if they are going to make a move, and it says that you do not even have the grace to say you were defeated.
In some circumstances it could be excused, like the example of an emergency, but you could still apologise later by messaging the person.
So, yes, it is unsportsmanlike.
Here is an example of playing on and hoping to draw via stalemate!
Nothing wrong with it!!!
I don't think that's playing in hopes of stalemate. It seems more like the computer just doesn't resign.
I think abandoning a game is bad sportsmanship.
7/5/2015 - Lasker - Alekhine, London 1913
by mjm16 5 minutes ago
Kasparov bad role model for others
by tkbunny 12 minutes ago
KG accepted question
by ericbowiereed 14 minutes ago
strength attainable without theory
by MrKornKid 21 minutes ago
Who Is The Best Players In Chess History
by cheeseskates 23 minutes ago
Why are there so many scholars mates in scholistic tournies?
by Ziryab 24 minutes ago
I want to improve should I quit playing blitz?
by wonderballer 30 minutes ago
Mangus lost in Norway blitz?
by Martin_Stahl 33 minutes ago
Hurt/Heal World Chess Champions
by macer75 36 minutes ago
HOW LONG DOES IT TAKE? 1800+
by Zigwurst 40 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2015 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!