People who DO NOT RESIGN in a lost position.
Sort:
Etiquette is never over-rated.
some negative ideas are true
For lower rated players against other low-rated players, yes, definitely play until the end in tournaments because your opponent might make a mistake. Here's a recent game I played; yes, I was careless, but a lot of times when you think you've won, you just start to make silly mistakes (hence my qualifier on low-rated players).
ebolakitty wrote:
TyroneTheClone wrote:
That's a pretty negative idea don't you think? Not just bad people mess up is just wrong and there is value if you are willing to play on if your better you should prove it by oh I dunno actually playing through an entire game? (you should be able to win it being up by so much of course so why not play on) I'd surrender for sure if I lost my queen but my opponent should have no trouble mating me if they want the win, a mercy rule just take the fun out of it and a player isn't humiliated, its their choice to resign or play on, its much more humiliating if they lose a queen and are immediately notified that their opponent is the better human and they have no chance to improve the position or just their skills in general so why even try to play chess. Mercy rule is for matches that are clearly won but would take too long to finish and in that case stick to rapid if you think your opponent is going out of their way to waste your time. At that point they are just rude, but its usually not the case and they usually do resign when down by a queen, just saying they usually not a diabolical person if they want to play on.
No. I respectfully disagree. Negative would be to allow noxious behavior to continue. Chess is a board game. Board games were invented to improve social cohesion not to encourage all manner of misbehavior.
As to "proving it", invoke the mercy rule and it is automatically proven. If one claims victory by the mercy rule then it is perfectly legitimate because the mercy rule is a rule. No different than castling or capturing a pawn en passant.
Being a better human isn't about inflicting or enduring abusive crap. A better human says, "It looks like I blundered. Set'em up again."
Playing on to supposedly learn something? Plug the pgn into Arena or some other suitable platform and go from there. Let your opponent get on with his life.
The mercy rule doesn't have to be a hard forfeit. Maybe the losing side can ask for 5 more moves. Maybe it isn't invoked. Like a draw by threefold repetition must be claimed, the mercy rule would have to be actively invoked to operate.
I understand, I wouldn't want to wait around playing a game I've already won either. I just see a lot of people new to the games at low levels who don't fully understand why they should resign yet getting upset when their opponent claims victory, and leaves the lobby and they are stuck wishing they had a chance to redeem themselves. At higher levels people wouldn't mind but it may cause too much frustration for new players. Maybe a mercy function could be available in games where both players are above a certain level? or in time controls longer than blitz especially. That would just make sure there are less hard feelings because I know when new players are faced with someone demanding that they resign it can just make them give up on chess or make them salty etc. Time if more of an annoyance for strong players and if they are down by a queen they will know the game is lost anyway so mercy rule should be fine for them. It just has to be implemented in a way that is fair and players can agree with. I like the idea of the losing side requesting a limited amount of extra moves if they truly think they have a chance. Or they simply get 5 more moves to regain material before the other player is awarded the win. Maybe the computer gives the player a 'claim win by mercy rule' option after their opponent is down by a certain score for say 5 moves in a row. I just want people to agree with it so when I use the rule I don't get a whole bunch of 'u suk/to scared to play on' crap in the chat (not that it hurts me but they clearly are upset), Id rather exchange a nice gg and like you said set em up again, or get on with life. And definitely notify incoming players to the website that a mercy rule option is in effect so they can expect it and accept that it is a valid loss. So I actually like the idea but I think we can both agree would need to be implemented justly.
brennangraham wrote:
some negative ideas are true
That's agreeable.
I completely disagree... I'm not playing GMs or even Masters at my current rank. (Not even close) I could resign seeing they can mate me on the next move... why not make them prove they see it? Even if they don't see it, I might still be in a lost position. I'm not going to give my rating points away for free. If they mess up, I might be able to put them in perpetual check or lure them into a stale mate. I don't care if you don't want to play it out. The only question in my mind is whether I want to play it out. And if I want to play it out, I should be allowed to play it out. Beginners and Intermediate players tend to struggle in end game tactics. And I need to practice mine too. Even in a lost position, why not see how long you can drag it out? It's a game. It's not a race to get to the next game. What I find more offensive is when I'm playing someone ranked higher than me and I win a pawn and they resign simply because they are in a losing position (not lost). I don't want their points for free either. I want to fight for them. Why do you think someone owes you a resignation? That's just a mind set of being entitled to a win. Another thing is that even though you might see my position as lost, I may not. Perhaps etiquette would be to not judge others as being low class simply for wanting to play it out.
A mercy rule would be stupid. Chess has a clearly defined goal and end point - checkmate. Anything that ends the game before checkmate is just a nicety, but checkmate is still the aim and the only point at which a game is won.
it's bad etiquette. My question is does a time win and a mate win have the same value in the rating system
Yes. The rating system values a win the same, whether by time, resignation or mate.
The statement that "checkmate is ... the only point at which a game is won" is factually incorrect.
Quintus: "People should know when they are conquered."
Maximus: "Would you Quintus? Would I?"
I have done it and have had it done to me to be honest.
Some people on this site are a$$holes and taught and curse people when they blunder or play a bad move, that's the only time I have done it, but I have it done regularly to me though just when my opponent reaches a bad spot during the game.
True, but sometime chat can be helpful
winaxpc wrote:
why resgin?
A resign in time, saves nine.
lol Thor77
Who cares if they don't resign? They will lose automatically anyway so it's not an issue.
Maybe they are students of the Yasser Seirawan book course.
Page 25 of Play Winning Chess:
"If you are a beginner, I recommend that you never resign a game. Even in a hopeless position, you can still learn a lesson or two. Closely watch the way your opponent puts you out of your misery. It's just a matter of time before you will get to do it to someone else."
And even if they've never read or seen that book or passage, perhaps the same sentiment is running subconsciously in their minds in some form. Or perhaps they lack the experience to know that they are in a losing position.
Just checkmate and win. That's the game. If someone resigns, take it as a bonus. In following game in my opinion black resigned one move too early. If 73...Kc1 and 74 Qxb3, it's a stalemate!! After fighting for 2 months, why resign? The opponent is as likely to make a mistake as I am because basically both are not such great players.
1stClash, I like what you think... completely agree to all of it.
Benjamin_Brunson wrote:
Maybe they are students of the Yasser Seirawan book course.
Page 25 of Play Winning Chess:
"If you are a beginner, I recommend that you never resign a game. Even in a hopeless position, you can still learn a lesson or two. Closely watch the way your opponent puts you out of your misery. It's just a matter of time before you will get to do it to someone else."
LOL 
I guess we begginers should take the GM's advice 