that was nice, once i was playing my friend in 3min blitz, endgame K vs KQ ended up a stalemate, although i think he is a better player. usually he is good at avoiding the stalemate but it was in a flurry of quick moves, even know he had a bit fo time remaining
I don't resign because your opponent could create a stale mate by accident.
Exactly, stalemates happen a lot more in blitz.
Never surrender.
Yes never wave the white flag, or throw in the towel.
And this is why I resign so this can't happen to me.
that is an example where you would resign in normal play, but in blitz your opponent could easily make a mistake and stalemate you
I'm in a group that dosen't resign, ever !
Well, usualy I come to these thread topics about never resigning to tell the people starting them to use the search box at the upper right side of your screen. Which you should do, simply searching 'resign' will bring up dozens and dozens of threads about this topics.
But recently I played a game against someone rated higher then me and I simply could not play on because it came to a point where any move I made killed my position. It was TORTURE. When you have a bishop vs a q+r+a couple pawns sure w/e you can choose to run around till your mated and by very very slim chance be stalemated. but the position I was in there were still alot of pieces on the boar; my opponent just had a very good attack.
This was a blitz, and why torture yourself in getting massacred.
I agree about not resigning at least not too soon when I was much younger I played a Master he was rated 2225 on ICC he made it a mission to steam roll me and he nearly did he played very aggressively he had the game won but he made a mistake I turned the tables and checkmated him instead.
If your game is dead lost it's a bad idea to drag it out because your going to piss your opponent off who might think it's poor sportsmanship on your part but if you can push for a draw if you can get some more play out of the position it's your right to fight on nobody can tell you when and when not to resign.
I think the reason that masters resign is so that they don't have to go through the humiliation of being checkmated -- it's an honor thing. Capablanca was allegedly never checkmated in a recorded game. If you're fine with being checkmated, then I don't see why either side should complain.
They say this more in baseball: "Respect the game"! Not resigning disrespects the game of chess. If I screw up and lose a piece early, without compensation, I resign and try a re-match. I think that's more enjoyable for both participants.
That's about the dumbest comment I have heard. You resign the minute you are down a piece?? You must be rated under 1200 to make such stupid resignations. I think resigning is ok in some situations, but you can get a mate with almost anything, and, believe it or not, other players make mistakes EVERY game.
Never Say Die!
I'm in the group that resigns when all is lost. Why waist life, or time?
That's the point though, all is not lost! I'll bet you that Rybka could beat you if it was down a queen. The whole purpose is to gain a better position and see more than the opposition, which is almost always possible if you look hard enough. A lot of the time good positions are lost by trying to get ahead 1 piece.
I never resign , everybody can make a mistake so at least a stale {draw} is possible till the end . I've lost games because when I have a huge lead I tend to move too fast and make that mistake what turnes things around . I've won totally lost games because my oponent did the same thing , just 1 blunder .
good point, but some people have coaches. coaches mostly teach people how to not make mistakes, while the students do the rest their own.
and in an article shows about it. coaches give good things for learning in chess to their students.
i really think that.
Join Chess.com for free to add your comment! Already a member? Then login now to comment.
