Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

why do people stall when they are losing?


  • 17 months ago · Quote · #101

    learningthemoves

    I polled some of the higher ranking opponents I've defeated and strangely enough, most of them offered the same reason:

    Denial. Plain and simple. They struggle coming to grips with the reality they have just been defeated. They figure if they stall it a bit, then technically, if only for those few minutes, they are not yet officially the loser. 

  • 17 months ago · Quote · #102

    owltuna

    Well it's over. Crazy, I would have played out the position. Yeah, it's not pretty, but defending a position like that is going to sharpen your skills.

    I have three ongoing games right now that are clearly won, material advantage of at least +5 in all of them, and positional advantage as well. Two of the opponents are apparently stalling. To his credit, the one opponent where my material advantage is something like +12 is at least moving quickly.

    As an aside, I have a major distraction from chess going on right now, and I let all my opponents know that until after Monday, my moves may be coming at close to the maximum time control. I figure that's simply the right thing to do.

  • 17 months ago · Quote · #103

    SmyslovFan

    owltuna wrote:

    Well it's over. Crazy, I would have played out the position. Yeah, it's not pretty, but defending a position like that is going to sharpen your skills.

    ...

    As long as there is something to learn from the game, don't resign. 

    But also, play at an appropriate pace. That pace is determined not by the time control, but the pace you've been playing the game. It's natural to slow down in bad positions, but do not try to win a correspondence game that has been lost on the board by using the calendar as a weapon. 

    If you have reached a position that is completely hopeless, and both you and your opponent clearly know the fastest way to win, it's time to resign. You have nothing left to learn, except whether your opponent may expire before the game does.

  • 17 months ago · Quote · #104

    HolyKing

    thnx guys for all your help. finally got over.

  • 17 months ago · Quote · #105

    melogibbo

    i had a guy who did this to me, then he told me he didnt want to resign 'cos he wanted to stay above 1700 (he was just above at the time)

    Worked out worse for him though as I was losing 3 or 4 games against stronger opponents and I resigned them all before I ended up beating him.  Had he resigned when he should have, he wouldn't have lost so many points.

    I'm afraid some people care too much about rankings, no one likes losing sure but come on, be adult about it, you can't win them all right?

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #106

    owltuna

    SmyslovFan wrote:
     

    As long as there is something to learn from the game, don't resign. 

    But also, play at an appropriate pace....

    If you have reached a position that is completely hopeless, and both you and your opponent clearly know the fastest way to win, it's time to resign. You have nothing left to learn, except whether your opponent may expire before the game does.

    Resurrecting a dusty topic, but oh I need strength! I have a dead-won position in two games against a player who plays on in positions like this:

    This isn't one of my games, unfortunately. I am up to twenty or more moves from possible checkmate in both, possibly forty in one. To top it off, the player randomly goes on "vacation" from time to time. The only redeeming aspect is that the time control is 24 hours. <sigh>

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #107

    HolyKing

    Good luck.Laughing

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #108

    CP6033

    Well I was just playing a 5 day game and I was crushing the guy. Why don't people just resign? it would make my life so much easier (Chess life)

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #109

    melvinbluestone

    I don't know what's more ridiculous: the question, or the fact that people just keep asking it!? If you don't want to wait for your opponent, go play solitaire.

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #110

    owltuna

    Melvin Blue, it is a question of sportsmanship, at which chess players in particular seem to be sorely lacking. Yes, according to the rules one must grin and bear it, but "the rules" do not excuse the poor behavior.

    Although I love this game and have played it enthusiastically all my life, my experience is that the percentage of poor sportsmen is so high in chess, that it taints the enjoyment to the point where taking on a serious pursuit of excellence is not worth what one must bear in boorishness.

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #111

    Robkin

    senseless question, nobody likes to lose; some people are calm, some are choleric; if you want to get rid of it, play shorter time controls

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #112

    owltuna

    Yes, by all means, put up with the poor sportsmanship, and don't try to improve the sport by ridding it of the boors. Or find a pastime where the participants are not so predisposed to anti-social behavior (apropos that one poster thinks the only alternative to chess is solitaire!). I hate that this is the only choice, but the widespread apathy about poor sportsmanship makes it so.

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #113

    TitanCG

    They've lost that lovin feeling.

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #114

    mmuurrii

    they are afraid

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #115

    melvinbluestone

    I sympathize with players who are frustrated by stubborn opponents who play on in hopeless positions. But they have that right. You know that going in. To expect the other guy to throw in the towel when you think he should is unrealistic. Besides, he may not realize or believe he's losing. What was it Donald Byrne said after the so-called 'Game of the Century'? Something like most of the spectators thought he had a won game right when he resigned.

       Anyway, let's not forget about Kasparov. Of course he's not competing now, but he was pretty well known to be somewhat of a sore-loser, on the rare occasions when he did lose. If the top-gun is kind of a bad sport, what kind of an example did he set? But to be fair, he's just a human being, and emotions are part of the human condition and quite understandable, and even predictable, in any kind of competition. Players are gonna' stall for a variety of reasons, including bad sportsmanship and downright nastiness...... Might as well get used to it.

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #116

    owltuna

    I appreciate your reasoned response. I am unfortunately saddened that my return to chess after so many years of not playing has turned up the same widespread lack of sporting behavior that turned me away from it in the past.

    Yes, I agree, if one wants to play this game, one must get used to the fact that poor sportsmanship is accepted as part of the game. I wish it could be different. It's summer, so goodbye chess, hello golf, where slow play is rightly and strongly discouraged, both by the rules and by peer pressure. The fresh air will be a welcome relief.


Back to Top

Post your reply: