Resignation Etiquette???

 If you want to accept that tip as good advice, you can, but I don't think many would agree that it's good advice. It is wierd when an opponent plays out a completely lost game for 20 moves, only to resign a move before mate, but a win is a win, and both ways of winning are equally satisfying to me.

As I am playing a tournament (turn based 3d/move) game where at move 42 I won his Q and was left with B, N, Q, 4 pawns vs his K and blocked 1 pawn.  He is facing mate in one, and leading up to this point he was making multiple moves every day. I kindly sent a message saying that I will often times look for a stalemate in a severly lost position, but if nothing presents itself for the trap of one, I resign out of ettiquite for the game and for the others in the event.  

His reply was that I must not be very good at all as it took until move 59 to get to the mate in one position.  He posted the comment, but didnt make his move and has left his clock run down for the last 2 days.  I assume he will either time out or resign just before he is given a time out loss.

Annoying, classless, and a waste of all the tournament's players time.

Cheers,

Louprechaun

For resignation etiquette, see Aron Nimzovich

- - - I have my own rules I hope for - - - I hope my opponent will make three moves - - - then realize that I will probably check mate him in 49 moves - - - and having realized that he will then resign in the fourth or fifth move - - - 

- - - alas - - - most people don't follow my rule

Don't forget some losing positions can still be stalemated, there's an excellent example of this in one of the Chess Mentor lessons.

Also, it's always possible that human error can occur. A single slip might open up a decisive forking square, drawing the game. Also in various endgame positions, it's possible to draw when you have no pieces, and are up against a king and single pawn.

I forgot what exactly the conditions are, it's something like if the enemy pawn promotion square is rook or bishop square, the game is drawn as long as you can get your king to the promotion square. (I need to redo this endgame course in Chess Master, I always forget the scenario)

There are lots of hidden resources during the endgame, and sometimes a draw can be achieved from these wild positions.

In other cases, yes, a resign is obvious and when a position is completely lost you will notice most IM's and GM's resign the position..

One thing is certain: It is very rude to tell an opponent to resign. If he is making slow moves and annoying u, then he is very rude, and u can certainly never play him, or even report him. Telling an opponent to resign, however nicely, is really rude and unjustified in all cases. At the weak levels, players will often play to mate. And if they wantto time out and drag it on, ignore it and let them lose. Then u never have to play them again.

Almost any position can be SMed, but if your opponent is above even around the ~800 USCF level or higher, its almost never going to happen. That is why most players would resign, even against 800 players. It is really a lot to hope for that an opponent will stalemate u. Also, IMs and GMs usually resign if a piece is lost, or even less than that. They all know that if a pawn is lost without adequete compensation, it probably means the game is already decided, becausethe other master definitely has the technique to win. As for the King, pawn vs King, getting the king to a promotion square only guarantees a draw in rook files. For the others, the king may be forced away from the square. Unless a position is very complex, it is unreasonable to hope that ur opponent will make an error(u might err before he does). Only play bad moves hoping the opponent will make worse ones when u are dead lost and are hoping for a cheap trick.

I disagree blueparrot, I don't think most IM's or GM's resign after losing a single piece.

Also, it's not just a draw if you can get your king to the rook promotion square, there's another square you can use for a draw, I think it's the bishop promotion square.

I know of only one game where a strong player continued playing after losing a large amount of material. In Fischer's queen trap game, his opponent decided to play on down a queen for a piece.

I know of a lot of games where a GM resigns the second they lose a piece. In high level play, there is no practical chance to come back from that.

Here is the endgame I think you're thinking of:

I was actually talking about King and pawn vs King, but the same applies in this case. In your diagrams, the result indeed are both draw. But if the white king is close enough in the second diagram, a win can be forced. In all cases, being down a piece for nothing is 99.9% always lost in master play.

When you play 3d/move plus vacation there is always a chance that your opponent may pass away. That's the reason I suspect some folks play on to the bitter end. Based on my experience though this expectation goes exponentially down as the rating (and the age) increases.

The decision WHEN to surrender your king belongs to you, NOT your opponent !! This topic has been discussed count-less times in the forums, But when you try to write interesting chess related topics such as the one i wrote this morning, a funny satire as to what becomes of THE BANNED ?! gets axed by the staff . SORRY FOR GOING OFF TOPIC  just thought that should be said. 

I just had that happen to me- this guy kept offering me a draw when he was down like a queen a rook and three pawns, I kept declining, and he used some very innapropriate language as well as prolonging the game, and forcing me to keep on that game until he rage quit. It's extremely immature behavior and if this website has a report function, I would really like to find it.

Could send the link to those, as it would be very interesting to see.

I recently played someone who resigned after just 8 moves, after losing a minor piece, but he was certainly no grandmaster..

It's 3:57 AM and I just spent 3.5 hours doing calculus homework, so not right now, but maybe tomorrow I'll find some. A Short game was recently posted somewhere in the forums. By recent I mean within a month, so it might be hard to find.

Yikes! get some sleep.. I look forward to you posting those games.

Here are three I found:

That is correct. Also, if I were playing any player rated over 1800USCF, I would probably just resign immediateky as well.

In higher chess circles, it's customary to vigorously shoot your opponent the bird, immediately before resigning.

There is no etiquette requirement to resign a chess game. Or as Tartakover observed: nobody has ever won a chess game by resignation. What I find rude though are people who send you afterwards a note that you should "learn to resign". That just proves the most blatant unawareness of chess etiquette. As a player in a winning position I always strive to most efficiently end the game and never expect my opponent to resign. That is particularly true for Blitz and Bullet. If you don't want to go the full distance, don't play chess.