what`s this thing of expecting someone to resign ?

Low ranked players can easily make an error and lose an adevantage. If you`re good enough, get on and win, but don`t expect the other player to resign. 

A few times each month someone brings up this topic. Please lookup the previous threads about this for an answer.

More than that. The subject has become boring.

Those who are winning often take offense and say: "you're playing this out to the end even though I'm clearly winning? You think I'm going to make some nooby mistake? I be offended!! I dont make mistakes!"...

 

This shouldn't be half the deal people make it out to be. If someone wants to play a game to the end, they should be allowed to. After all, the goal of chess IS to checkmate your opponent...not to force your opponent to resign. There's really not much to discuss here...

After the tightest game I've probably ever played in my life, I finally won a K+P vs K endgame and the guy made me finish the K+Q checkmate. At one level it's annoying but in another way it can be seen as a courtesy of allowing the winner the satisfaction of the win.

 

IIRC, Fischer's opponent allowed exactly this in the "Game of the Century"

Negoba wrote:

After the tightest game I've probably ever played in my life, I finally won a K+P vs K endgame and the guy made me finish the K+Q checkmate. At one level it's annoying but in another way it can be seen as a courtesy of allowing the winner the satisfaction of the win.

 

IIRC, Fischer's opponent allowed exactly this in the "Game of the Century"

---

 I don't knock anyone for forcing you to play to the end with only three pieces on the board. I've seen so many times the person with just the king pull out a stalemate because his opponent goofs.

And, realistically, I don't knock anyone else for wanting to play to the end. it's the best way to learn many things, such as trying to play from a weaker position, trying to force a draw, and just by observing how your opponent tries to finish you off. This can also be a good learning experience for the player with the advantage, practice for keeping your opponent down and finishing them off.

Either way, players learn a lot more from playing it out than from just giving up. I had a player a couple of weeks ago resign against me and I was kind of upset because the game was far from over. I had the advantage, but it wasn't a big one and there was still plenty of material on the board. I was very surprised when he resigned. 

if a player wishes to fight to the death, let them. it is a learning experience but dont intimidate them into submission. you should know when you are beat, but until then, keep playing.

Good God, we need a sticky.  This comes up at least once a week.

I expect all people that play me to resign after the 6th move, and I get terribly angry when they don't.

 

 

Thinking people are just going to resign is absurd. If someone wants to resign, they will resign. If they don'y, just win. Plain and simple. Resigning should really only be used

A) When the opponent has made a blunder which should force them to resign

or

B) When they themselves don't want to finish out the game because they are demoralized. 

Good topic. Maybe we can have a daily discussion about resigning.
There have been said already allot about this topic.Its interesting to read it if you want to read all the different views.

Given two players, one of them may realize a winning advantage and understand the game well enough to demonstrate this advantage.  Don't expect the other person to come to the same realization at the same time as it is unlikely except with the most knowledgable players.

sorry bringing up a repeat topic, but I`m new to the sight and haven`t read all the old stuff.(sheesh). If you`re not interested, don`t get involved.

But I saw i bloke complain that his opponent wouldn`t resign and my opponent was asking me to. At the level I`m playing, anything could happen. I think it is inappropriate and generally piss-weak. 

It is "piss-weak" for someone to ask.  But when this thread appeared there where two other threads discussing resignation on the first page.

Maybe there ought to be a resignation forum :)

not resigning not a problem per se - combined with slowing down rate of play to the maximum, very frustrating.

 

?

if the ? is for me lukeyboy:

I played a player on this site and it was almost like live chess, until they blundered and the game was lost (blunder gave me a rook, a queen if checkmate was to be saved, and pieces deep in enemy territory).

Then play was every 3 days, 5 mins before the time is up.

Frustrating when you do not have a forced mate in less then 15 moves - stringing a lost game out for 45 days, with my opponent hoping for a win on time i guess. Then when mate was next move, he let the time expire.

Seems this was the standard way this person played, 75% of games he lose were timeout losses (should've checked before accepted I guess) and the sample of games I looked at were strung out in the same way as mine.

i actually appreciate having the topic brought up, since i've not looked at the forums for this, and there was the subject. i understand it's been repeated.

i am one of "those" who agrees that someone should resign when they are clearly beaten by a strong player. apparently others think differently. i have a hard time believing that i should hang around if i have a king and the other guy has a rook, bishop, knight, and a pawn that he's going to queen (just for entertainment value). if you're against a new player or someone who makes blunders that's one thing. however, a strong player is not going to make the stalemate mistake. i think it's time to "man up" and admit the loss. i've certainly done it many times. are people so concerned with their rating that they just "refuse to lose"? it's a rating, it's not cash.

there are situations where you certainly should not automatically resign; you've just lost a piece early in the game, stuff like that. one thing i have not done is sat around and got slaughtered - guess i'll never understand that. i understand the frustration of those whose opponents abused the time rules like texaspete's situation above. so my vote is...when you have lost, resign!