eternal21 wrote: redearth329 wrote: Hmmm, I was just reading over article 10 of the FIDE 'laws of chess,' and I couldn't for the life of me find the rule stating that someone must resign when down in material. Maybe someone can tell me where this rule is to be found? It's not a rule per se. Just like there isn't a rule that forces you to respond to your opponent's 'hello'. Consider it common courtesy. I personally don't tell my opponent to resign when they are clearly losing - it's their right to prolong the inevitable. But they sure better not expect me to play them again - I don't like wasting my time for no reason. Here's more on the proper chess etiquette: "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"
redearth329 wrote: Hmmm, I was just reading over article 10 of the FIDE 'laws of chess,' and I couldn't for the life of me find the rule stating that someone must resign when down in material. Maybe someone can tell me where this rule is to be found?
Hmmm, I was just reading over article 10 of the FIDE 'laws of chess,' and I couldn't for the life of me find the rule stating that someone must resign when down in material. Maybe someone can tell me where this rule is to be found?
It's not a rule per se. Just like there isn't a rule that forces you to respond to your opponent's 'hello'. Consider it common courtesy.
I personally don't tell my opponent to resign when they are clearly losing - it's their right to prolong the inevitable. But they sure better not expect me to play them again - I don't like wasting my time for no reason.
Here's more on the proper chess etiquette:
"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"
You've hit the nail on the head! Crystal clear! Perfectly explained! Yours is the clearest, soundest and most definite explanation to this issue. Congratulations Eternal 21!
When your opponent doesn't resign in a clearly lost position it gives you a chance to find a fast, pretty mate. I live for fast, pretty mates in more ways than one!
I like how karpovenko said hes not the only one who "suffers." Its hard to imagine that finishing a won position is very painful
De-Lar wrote: karpovenko wrote: De-Lar wrote: Karpovenko your post is reported. There is never a place to call somebody a cheat in the forums. Like other people have said, If you have a problem use the report abuse button. De-Lar: Do whatever you have to do. I have simply stated my warning to all the chess community, in case they come across this guy. So you are all alerted. That's all. As simple as that. So De-Lar: carry on with your life. You remind me of Flanders, from The Simpson's. Personal insults are petty, childish, and get you nowhere. But the fact is, I don't take this as an insult. Believe it or not, I'm actually proud to have morals in a society such as ours.
karpovenko wrote: De-Lar wrote: Karpovenko your post is reported. There is never a place to call somebody a cheat in the forums. Like other people have said, If you have a problem use the report abuse button. De-Lar: Do whatever you have to do. I have simply stated my warning to all the chess community, in case they come across this guy. So you are all alerted. That's all. As simple as that. So De-Lar: carry on with your life. You remind me of Flanders, from The Simpson's.
De-Lar wrote: Karpovenko your post is reported. There is never a place to call somebody a cheat in the forums. Like other people have said, If you have a problem use the report abuse button.
Karpovenko your post is reported. There is never a place to call somebody a cheat in the forums. Like other people have said, If you have a problem use the report abuse button.
De-Lar: Do whatever you have to do. I have simply stated my warning to all the chess community, in case they come across this guy. So you are all alerted. That's all. As simple as that. So De-Lar: carry on with your life. You remind me of Flanders, from The Simpson's.
Personal insults are petty, childish, and get you nowhere. But the fact is, I don't take this as an insult. Believe it or not, I'm actually proud to have morals in a society such as ours.
Aleluya!! Aleluya!! Flanders: May the Lord be with you... now and always!!
Ellbert wrote: Be the teacher.
As a new player I too am very reluctant to resign - I am looking for the game (and my opponent) to be my teacher - just to get to an end game situation is very satisfying to me - so let me also suggest patience and see yourselves as our teachers - thanks & aloha
karpovenko wrote: RELee1865 wrote: karpovenko, I had an opponent that had just a bishop and 3 pawns and I had a queen, 2 rooks, three minors and some odd pawns and I had to wait till I had to mate them I know I'm not the only one who suffers these... how shall I put it? ... (We should create a new vocabulary item to name these players) So what do you suggest we should do to cope with them? Do you feel like playing a rematch with someone who has made you waste your time continuing to play a completely lost case?
RELee1865 wrote: karpovenko, I had an opponent that had just a bishop and 3 pawns and I had a queen, 2 rooks, three minors and some odd pawns and I had to wait till I had to mate them
karpovenko, I had an opponent that had just a bishop and 3 pawns and I had a queen, 2 rooks, three minors and some odd pawns and I had to wait till I had to mate them
I know I'm not the only one who suffers these... how shall I put it? ... (We should create a new vocabulary item to name these players) So what do you suggest we should do to cope with them? Do you feel like playing a rematch with someone who has made you waste your time continuing to play a completely lost case?
to cope, just play the game out as quick and tactically as you can. as far as playing rematches with these people, I don't think I would no.
I think sometimes I will resign when I'm losing but sometimes I would not.When I play vsing (rating + than me) I think I would resign expect if I'm losing but I have a little bit of chance.It's better if you don't resign when you are losing because if there's a stealmate or you can regain your losing material by some tactical.I usually don't resign because I've played games that I was losing a I've got a draw or even I win by the tactical and stealmate :) Be patient when your oppennent is losing and be very carefull if it will be stealmate.Even you are losing don't resign and try to get tactical and stealmate because when you are losing some people don't think much about the game.They think that they already win so they don't think that much.Also,if you don't resign when you are losing and play the end game with - of material you can learn something about the end game.That's what I suggest.You can think it.
i never could understand some peoples annoyance,at people who refuse to resign!?i personally push things to the limit in all my games.theres always a chance to pull the game out of the bag so to speak. admitedly if im totally cooked then yes i will get out of the oven
I've resigned myself to the reality that this topic will never truly die.
Seriously though, how about a new Forum Category exclusively for discussions of resignation etiquette and vacation abuse? We could call it "Figments of Our Imagination"... or "Stuff We Hate about Correspondence Chess."
hi deepgreene,yes it is one of those neverending discussions!! hate correspondence chess never!?! due to work the only time i got to play for years was by post.but it was very very slow.lol
deepgreene, probably all topics eventually reach this discussion (although this one http://www.chess.com/forum/view/community/7-deadly-sins started with it) - in an equivalent way to Godwin's Law for news group postings.
Resign ? Yes, under the right circumstances, when I am faced with an opponent I regard as honourable..But where I meet opponents whom I regard as rather bolshie...i.e. rather nasty, with a superior attitude, looking down their proverbial noses at somebody who is well below their rating, well then, I take the attitude of the Roman matron who handed her husband his shield as he went off to war..In her words, come back with your shield or on it..As far as I am concerned in such cases, my opponent will have to earn his win.. but I am simply not going to resign..Call me bloody-minded if you will, but that's my way of it...
artfizz wrote: deepgreene, probably all topics eventually reach this discussion (although this one http://www.chess.com/forum/view/community/7-deadly-sins started with it) - in an equivalent way to Godwin's Law for news group postings.
LOL. Thanks. I knew Godwin's Law, but not by name. :-)
if i'm in a hopeless situation, i used to just resign.now i usually ask my opponent if they mind playing it out a little more, (to see if i can work a stalemate). this usually offsets any feelings of wasting time. when i see that it's lost though, then i'm done.
I've been reading plenty of people who say that higher ranked players "know when to resign" and that it's a courtesy to do so when losing. However let me tell you about my last win. I was playing a stronger player in a chess.com tournament and after a tough battle I got him in a complicated position, where he sliped and got into checkmate position. What he did was write a message to congratulate me for the win (since he naturally could foresee the result) and played the forced moves that led to mate. I think that was the most polite thing to do and best attitude I've seen.
Don't know about you, but I prefer to see the mate happen; and was not annoyed at all to play the winning line. Nevertheless I understand not everyone feels the same. So let me tell you about this other game I played earlier in the same tournament. I got to a loosing ending of pawn Vs pawn and knight. I kept playing hoping to get his pawn (that was far away from his king) and get a draw, but he played very preciselly and, when the win was inevitable, he sent a message saying "I think I've won this one" and posted the winning line towards his pawn promotion. So I just agreed and resigned.
Conclusion: just COMUNICATE. Not everyone feels the same about playing or resigning, so if you know you have a wining line, just politely post it and your oponent will probably resign. But ultimately, it's his desition and you have to respect it the same way you get that choice when loosing. Why is it so terrible to play a wining game? I have this feeling most of us who really enjoy playing chess, beyond the desperate search of a win; really don't get so annoyed about someone resigning or not. You WILL get the win points ppl, just relax.
I believe this is probably one of the most vital discussions on chess.com
karpovenko 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" You've hit the nail on the head! Crystal clear! Perfectly explained! Yours is the clearest, soundest and most definite explanation to this issue. Congratulations Eternal 21!
"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"
As much as I would like to - I can't take credit for that quote. Somebody else posted it in another similar topic. I simply decided to start pasting it in, every single time the matter of resigning comes up.
If I am correct, this topic - and ones like it - are a measure of the health of chess.com - its blood pressure, if you like.The existence of this topic - and its precedecessors and successors - indicates that there is both a sufficient supply of 'newbies' to whom this topic is fresh - and an adequate residue of 'oldies' - to whom this topic is stale. I predict catastrophic consequences for chess.com if this topic were ever to die out completely.
DON't resign guys~
TiagoDevesa wrote: http://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/read-this--- wtf?
http://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/read-this---
wtf?