This is basically a self-correcting problem. Only beginners or casual-level players would play on after losing a piece without compensation. From the club-level (around 1700) up, players would resign in such positions because it's just a matter of technique for the other side to wrap up the game. If your casual-level opponent doesn't resign and you're a casual player yourself, then that's okay because you could still play poorly and lose the game. If you're a club-level player, then why play against people who are a class below you? If I choose to play against a beginner, I wouldn't complain that the game wasn't a challenge. The point is, if your game improves from the casual to the club level - meaning if you're able to win "won" positions easily - you will naturally stop coming across players who don't resign in lost positions.
People who DO NOT RESIGN in a lost position.
Should'nt black resign after 3.f6??
resigners should lose fewer rating points than matees
This is exponentially worse in 4 player
This complaint goes way back. I understand the Persians complained that the 300 Spartans should have given up and gone home too and not wasted their time. Go tell it to the Spartans or perhaps GW at Valley Forge, or even FDR on the Day after Pearl Harbor. Too bad you weren't there to advise the Travis, Bowie and Crockett at the Alamo, or to tell Winston his quote should have been "always give in, always give in, always give in..."
What do you think about them? What to do about them? When I am a Queen up and winning position my opponent DO NO RESIGN!
Frustrating...
Exactly. Thats the point so the frustrated winning person could maybe make a mistake.
I, personally, usually don't resign unless there's basically no hope. If I'm down to a few pawns and my opponent still has a few pieces left, I'll call it quits. If the material difference is single digits, though, I'll play on. At my level (which isn't very high), players make mistakes. It just takes one mistake to allow an opponent to get back on their feet. I play for that moment.
Basically: If I resign, I'm guaranteed to lose. If I keep playing, there's a chance (no matter how small) I might win.
Too bad you weren't there to advise the Travis, Bowie and Crockett at the Alamo,
Actually, Travis, Bowie et al, should have resigned. Getting slaughtered for nothing was stupid. But this has nothing to do with chess. We're not going to die gloriously at Thermopylae. It's just a matter of playing on for a few moves.
FUN FACT: Modern historians estimate that there were around 7,000 Greeks facing the Persians at Thermopylae of whom 300 were Spartan warriors. So why do the Spartans get all the credit? A better PR department?
The reason that Spartans get the credit is their effort allowed Greece time to get its act together and raise an army that held off the capture of all Greece, same with the Alamo. Same with a sac in chess. Sometimes when you are a Queen up it is because there was a Queen sac. Oh I know, only people who know they can safely take a Queen sac will do so, Ha Ha.
Should'nt black resign after 3.f6??
Are you complaining about a player that is such a novice in this game that they are not resigning on the third move. Players like this don't even know they are in trouble. Give them some games to learn something. Were you never a beginner??
Ah. You are a real historian then. I think it is because the writers of that time sort of were biased. Most of the battles have histories written that are fairly contemporary with the times. Like now, they liked heroes and the Spartans were, if tragic, still heroic also. Most wars are won by ordinary people with ordinary skills who face up to the horrors of war on a very personal basis and who rarely get the credit they deserve in my opinion. Also check on how long it took that Athenian Fleet to be assembled while the Spartans were distracting them at big T. Anyway rather than complain about people who fight to the bitter end (even in chess) I think they are rather admirable. I love a football team that can be losing 48 to 0 in the last minutes of the game and is still giving it their all,
Ah. You are a real historian then. I think it is because the writers of that time sort of were biased. Most of the battles have histories written that are fairly contemporary with the times. Like now, they liked heroes and the Spartans were, if tragic, still heroic also. Most wars are won by ordinary people with ordinary skills who face up to the horrors of war on a very personal basis and who rarely get the credit they deserve in my opinion. Also check on how long it took that Athenian Fleet to be assembled while the Spartans were distracting them at big T. Anyway rather than complain about people who fight to the bitter end (even in chess) I think they are rather admirable. I love a football team that can be losing 48 to 0 in the last minutes of the game and is still giving it their all,
Football is dumb.
if you are a queen up and a winning position, why don't you end it quickly instead of complaining?
DENVER
Too bad you weren't there to advise the Travis, Bowie and Crockett at the Alamo,
Actually, Travis, Bowie et al, should have resigned. Getting slaughtered for nothing was stupid. But this has nothing to do with chess. We're not going to die gloriously at Thermopylae. It's just a matter of playing on for a few moves.
FUN FACT: Modern historians estimate that there were around 7,000 Greeks facing the Persians at Thermopylae of whom 300 were Spartan warriors. So why do the Spartans get all the credit? A better PR department?
The reason that Spartans get the credit is their effort allowed Greece time to get its act together and raise an army that held off the capture of all Greece, same with the Alamo. Same with a sac in chess. Sometimes when you are a Queen up it is because there was a Queen sac. Oh I know, only people who know they can safely take a Queen sac will do so, Ha Ha.
If you are a queen up because of a Queen sac that actually had some merit then it probably isn't a 'lost position' anyway. Though if someone is a full Queen up then one party or other should probably be resigning. If they are good players then either someone lost a Queen or they sac'd it for a clear win. If they are poor players then someone just lost a Queen and could either play on or quit wasting their time and play a new game with a full army instead!
All right. Let's look at this another way. Suppose for arguments sake, a person should resign when they are a Queen down. How about if they are a rook down, should they resign. How about a knight down? Where does it stop? A pawn down? They have lost the initiative but material is even? How about when they are up material but you have "compensation" a good attack? I like the current way where everyone is free to resign when and only when they personally think they should. The evaluation of whether or not one side is far enough ahead can come in the discussion and analysis AFTER the game has been played out, not before.
They don't resign, it's their fault. Just checkmate him. If he feels tired later after the game, it is his problem, not yours!!! So do not mind them.....
#GoodLuck Don't forget to do the same if u are in a losing position cause in a tournament, I blundered a queen but checkmated my opponent. LOL
All right. Let's look at this another way. Suppose for arguments sake, a person should resign when they are a Queen down. How about if they are a rook down, should they resign. How about a knight down? Where does it stop? A pawn down? They have lost the initiative but material is even? How about when they are up material but you have "compensation" a good attack? I like the current way where everyone is free to resign when and only when they personally think they should. The evaluation of whether or not one side is far enough ahead can come in the discussion and analysis AFTER the game has been played out, not before.
I'm not saying people shouldn't be free to resign, just that if you are a Queen down then you could better spend time on a new game.
I've often resigned games with even material personally, but equally I have played on a piece down too, usually in Bullet or Blitz.
The strong players know when to resign.
Sometimes, players will play on so they can use the experience to learn something. They can watch how their opponent converts the position into a win, how they coordinate their pieces, etc.