Discuss.

?

I'm playing a guy who continues to play on after he has given a positional concession in his pawn structure. I don't understand why he doesn't just assume that I will convert this positional advantage into a material advantage, and then convert that into a won position, and then win the game.

Thoughts?

"It is generally considered proper chess etiquette to resign clearly lost positions. The proper time to resign should vary with one’s chess ability. Most beginners should probably play on until they are checkmated. But more advanced players should resign clearly lost positions when they are certain that if they were on the other side of the position, they could beat even a master."

(link for the above is: http://www.ksca.us/FAQ/Quick_Guide.pdf"

lol

eternal21 wrote:

"It is generally considered proper chess etiquette to resign clearly lost positions. The proper time to resign should vary with one’s chess ability. Most beginners should probably play on until they are checkmated. But more advanced players should resign clearly lost positions when they are certain that if they were on the other side of the position, they could beat even a master."

(link for the above is: http://www.ksca.us/FAQ/Quick_Guide.pdf"

 Lol,  they should probably just put that on a banner somewhere with high visibility

orejano wrote:

I have a similar problem than you ozzie, I'm playing black against a guy and I'm already up in material from the very beginnging, check it out:

 I'm convinced!

some people resign when they are completely  lost and some people don't, this bothers some people but not others. Erik is building separate web sites to accomodate everybody. He will either have ads on these web sites or you will pay a fee. This will bother some people but not others.

You're all laughing but check this game out.

http://www.chess.com/echess/game.html?id=6495369

I am a pawn up with some slightly better placed pieces, and I was a bit surprised at my opponent's resignation...

But to be fair, compare this position with what it was 10 moves earlier and it may explain why my opponent felt dejected enough to resign. But still, I was quite surprised.

I must give my thanks to Korchnoi, without whose strong moves against Karpov way back in 1978 I would have felt quite inferior against black's strong looking pawn center.

You should never resign!!!! Nobody ever won by resigning.  Here's an example.  As other posters stated - black has many opportunities for a stalemate (or even win) here.  For example White player may get into car accident, and then a mere month later Black will win on time.  Or White player may get tired of playing Chess, and close his account, and Black emerges victorious once more.  Or White may start feeling sorry for Black and resign out of pity, and you got it - Black wins again!

ozzie_c_cobblepot wrote:

You're all laughing but check this game out.

http://www.chess.com/echess/game.html?id=6495369

I am a pawn up with some slightly better placed pieces, and I was a bit surprised at my opponent's resignation...

But to be fair, compare this position with what it was 10 moves earlier and it may explain why my opponent felt dejected enough to resign. But still, I was quite surprised.

I must give my thanks to Korchnoi, without whose strong moves against Karpov way back in 1978 I would have felt quite inferior against black's strong looking pawn center.

You're technically 2 pawns ahead (he loses his pawn the very next turn, and that's not even counting his isolated pawn.  He realizes continuting against a player 200 pts above him would be a waste of time for both of you, given his deficit in material.  I'd probably do the same.  He certainly deserves his rating, and his nick-name (PerfectGent).

eternal21: if I win black's c-pawn, isn't my a-pawn loose?

De-Lar wrote:

eternal21, what on earth are you talking about?  Eternal21 has it in his head that if you don't resign, you are lower than scum.  I think he needs to learn to keep his emotions in check.

Reading comprehension 101.  I was simply poking fun at the other side of the story (just like nobody should be resigning because inferior pawn structure).  My personal view is expressed in the post about proper chess etiquette right before.

And your 24. Rc1 is a mistake.  I'd take the pawn my my Bishop instead.

ozzie_c_cobblepot wrote:

eternal21: if I win black's c-pawn, isn't my a-pawn loose?

It is, but you can immediately compensate by going after his unprotected e-pawn.

c'est tres amusant!!!!