Why people refuse to resign?

Sort:
nklristic
bread4duck wrote:
 

I wouldn't normally look through someone's history but I wanted to understand an example of the complaint so I found this where OP blundered 2 rooks in a row.

 

Don't take this the wrong way OP but this game says to me that your policy of blocking people that don't resign is hurting your chess because even as someone that's a couple of hundred points below you some of your endgame moves don't make sense. Even once you lost your rooks (which is easily done) you were in a massive winning position because you had all 4 pawns on the right hand side in play Vs Black's 2. You could have easily overwhelmed black if you'd moved them up together instead of sending them up one at a time (on move 46 if you'd played f5 you basically would have won because black couldn't have stopped you promoting a pawn). It feels like from this game you're very good at openings but because you (presumably) resign when a piece down and block people that don't you don't have much experience of endgames and that means you're prone to endgame blunders. 

He was pressured on the clock. For me, 10|0 is a pretty difficult time control. You are sometimes lulled in a false sense of security: "Yeah, 10 minutes, plenty of time" and one or 2 tougher decisions later, and you have 2 minutes left... Even 5|5 is easier to play. You know beforehand that you don't have much time, and it is still more difficult to flag than in 10|0. 10|0 is a rapid game in name only.

In 10|0, a lot of games will be decided by the clock, either by flagging or by blundering due to the lack of time. So playing on in a losing position is even more understandable in faster games like these.

BaronVonChickenpants
rollingronnie wrote:

Dear friends,

I play 10 min games with a ELO score of around 1400-1500.

I wish to discuss why there are so many people on chess.com who simply refuse to resign a losing game. I think it's a lack of respect and a waste of time to not resign when you don't have a decent chance of winning anymore. Hoping for a couple of blunders, running out of time, or a blunderdraw. It annoys the hell out of me. I block everyone who does that, but they just keep on coming. I also notice some nationalities doing this a lot more than others. I wish there was a pool with opponents that like to play respectfully.

Please also join the discussion if you are one of those douche bags Help me understand why you are doing this.

In Blitz and Rapid playing the clock is just as important as playing the board.  If you have used up 95% of your time to get into a winning position people are entitled to prove that you can mate them in the remaining time. 

 

If you are in such a winning position then it shouldn't be difficult to win the game anyway, so some one not reigning shouldn't really be a problem

BaronVonChickenpants
rollingronnie wrote:

 

The thing is these people also don't resign when they only have their king left against say 2 queens.

 

In cases like this then its a trivial win for the player with the queens , probably no move than a handful of moves, and probably premovable in many cases. Its hardly a problem to make a few extra moves to complete the game

rollingronnie

So you think it is because of the 10 minutes that people refuse to resign? This is useful information actually. How often does this happen in other games?

wyoav211933

There is nothing wrong with not resigning. Even if you avoid "blundering," not all material leads guarantee an easy to execute win, in fact some lead to a downright draw still due to stalemates, threefold repetition, or perpetual check. The short time increment also encourages one to play on in a losing position if the opponent is in a time struggle in a winning,yet complicated position because winning by time is no less dignified than winning by checkmate or resignation. I know you say that you loose focus and interest once in a seemingly winning position, but having focus and knowing how to convert a winning position is just as much a part of chess as openings and tactics. I mean come on, your playing 10 minute games with no increment. You can't focus for what would only be 20 minutes max?

BaronVonChickenpants
rollingronnie wrote:

So you think it is because of the 10 minutes that people refuse to resign? This is useful information actually. How often does this happen in other games?

Most likely. If you've got yourself low on time but in a winning position then if I were playing you I'd certainly play on to see if you can finish the game in the allowed time.  Maybe try having an increment also, so 10 +10 or 15+10

nklristic
rollingronnie wrote:

So you think it is because of the 10 minutes that people refuse to resign? This is useful information actually. How often does this happen in other games?

It happens in 45|45 as well and sometimes it is effective, but it is tougher to turn around those games. So as it is less effective than in shorter games, it probably happens in a slightly smaller amount. But trust me when I say this, I have played many fascinating games where I had to defend a piece up.

The opponent gains initiative for the piece, engine says it is totally lost for him and yet it is certainly not that simple to convert in practice. In some games I had to find a series of only moves to win. There were games where I am lost and have the mission to complicate a game as best as I can.


And I am glad that I've played games like that because those games force you to find some ideas you wouldn't normally.

As for games where someone losses a queen for instance, in most cases people either resign on this level or play on for a few moves trying to checkmate and if it doesn't work, then resign if they feel there is nothing there. For me it depends - I try to play on, but sometimes I just don't feel like it. So there are games where I resign immediately and games where I play on to the bitter end going for some stalemate tricks if I can find some.


mathiasfreytag

As a general tip,If you are up a piece, go for trades... I myself dont resing when down 1 piece and countless times i managed to win, and i must say, those games are the most fun to me... Ill post a victory i had when down 2 bishops

mathiasfreytag

https://chess.com/live/game/28205979097 I was down 2 bishops and the mate i delivered was beautful! Another thing that comes to my mind is, give blitz a try, in 10 minutes is easy to get to 1400-1500 elo, in blitz that's like a 1100-1200 elo, because a Lot more players play at blitz/bullet

mathiasfreytag

[Event "lizstomaniac vs. mathiasfreytag"] [Site "Chess.com"] [Date "2021-10-19"] [White "lizstomaniac"] [Black "mathiasfreytag"] [Result "0-1"] [WhiteElo "994"] [BlackElo "1085"] [TimeControl "blitz"] [Termination "mathiasfreytag venceu por xeque-mate"] 1. d4 c5 2. e3 cxd4 3. exd4 d5 4. Nf3 Nc6 5. Nc3 Nf6 6. Bd3 e6 7. O-O Bd6 8. Re1 h6 9. a3 O-O 10. b4 a6 11. Na4 Bd7 12. Nc5 Ra7 13. b5 b6 14. bxc6 Bxc6 15. Nxa6 b5 16. Nb4 Bb8 17. Nxc6 Qc7 18. Nxa7 Qxa7 19. Bxb5 g5 20. Qd3 Qc7 21. a4 g4 22. Ne5 Rd8 23. g3 Ne4 24. Bxh6 f6 25. Nc6 Nxg3 26. Nxb8 Nf5 27. Be3 Rxb8 28. a5 g3 29. fxg3 Nxg3 30. Bf2 Ne4 31. Rxe4 dxe4 32. Qe2 Kf7 33. Bg3 Qc3 34. Qe1 Qxd4+ 35. Bf2 Rg8+ 36. Kh1 Qd5 37. Ba4 e3# 0-1

x-0460907528
rollingronnie wrote:

Hmm, ok. To a certain extent I can understand that. Even if several pieces behind.

The thing is these people also don't resign when they only have their king left against say 2 queens. What is there to practice? It's simply finishing the game, with a very minor chance of draw, if the winning person makes a huge blunder. 

ELO 1400-1500 are not beginners. They know the endgame, and they know when they cannot win. I understand practice in 600-1100 regions, but not here. I think it's just bad sportsmanship. 'If I go down, I'll waste your time'.

you are playing a ten minute game and you are worried about having your time wasted? seriously?

x-0460907528
rollingronnie wrote:

I guess i simply don't understand the mindset. Why would you want to 'win' a game you already lost? Then you both lose basically. It's bad courtesy. It will not make you any better at chess, only annoy the other party and wasting playing time for both.

To me the game is about winning it right, not just about getting a statistical win. The game is beautiful when played right between equal opponents. Blunderous games are ugly, so better to end quickly. 

great. lose ugly in a tournament and see who they give the trophy to.

x-0460907528
uniquetoad4 wrote:

i understand and i am like that. but sometimes the position is so lost that the other party just make me wait 15 mins. like they dont move

what you are describing is stalling which is a completely different issue from what is being discussed here. 

x-0460907528
rollingronnie wrote:

All true. The thing is that I get really annoyed that I have to continue playing a game that is basically over. I just wanna be done with it and move to the next. It feels like a waste of time. So I don't focus anymore. 

By the way, the blocking makes no difference at all

if you tend to lose your focus when you are ahead, that is on you.

Tribbled
rollingronnie wrote:

I guess i simply don't understand the mindset. Why would you want to 'win' a game you already lost? Then you both lose basically. It's bad courtesy. It will not make you any better at chess, only annoy the other party and wasting playing time for both.

To me the game is about winning it right, not just about getting a statistical win. The game is beautiful when played right between equal opponents. Blunderous games are ugly, so better to end quickly. 

I think you have this wrong. Trying to beat someone on time or provoke a blunder are valid strategies.

Not flashy strategies, no "immortal game" is going to look like this, but valid nonetheless. Every sport and game includes some annoying / grind tactics and it doesn't make someone a bad actor for using such tactics.

 

Incidentally, I am a quick resigner personally. I don't like a drawn-out, lingering death. But I don't hold it against people for wanting to play out their losing positions. Only disconnect  / abandoning is bad sportsmanship, and chess.com makes a similar distinction.

EuphoniousJones

Play until #

x-0460907528

@rollingronnie: in each of your last two losses you were down a piece or more and were clearly in a losing position long before the game ended. yet you required your opponent to play them out to checkmate. so i was wondering--why is it ok for you to play games out games but when your opponents choose to it is somehow a sign of 'disrespect?' what exactly makes you so special?

woton

There have been numerous threads on this topic, and I have never understood why people get so upset when their opponent won't resign.  The extra time required to complete a game is usually just a few minutes (I play G30), and it doesn't require a lot of thought.

Additionally, when my opponents resign, I usually finish the game against the computer, a little endgame practice is always useful.  

Also, you might want to look at David Smerdon's book "The Complete Chess Swindler."  It gives some insight into why a player might want to "hang in there."

 

luh_gio
rollingronnie wrote:

Dear friends,

I play 10 min games with a ELO score of around 1400-1500.

I wish to discuss why there are so many people on chess.com who simply refuse to resign a losing game. I think it's a lack of respect and a waste of time to not resign when you don't have a decent chance of winning anymore. Hoping for a couple of blunders, running out of time, or a blunderdraw. It annoys the hell out of me. I block everyone who does that, but they just keep on coming. I also notice some nationalities doing this a lot more than others. I wish there was a pool with opponents that like to play respectfully.

Please also join the discussion if you are one of those douche bags Help me understand why you are doing this.

They do this because they believe they have a chance to win you never know happy.png

neos01

Stalling is bad etiquette. But playing in a lost position isn't. 

 

Try to look at it in a different perspective. 

 

If you have a winning position and then you lose, then you simply lack the ability to convert your advantage properly. Even if you are ahead, you cant allow any counter play from your opponent. Try not to make any excuse when you lose, a lost is a lost. Identify why you lose, is it time trouble, carelessness, or something else and then work on it.

 

Dont forget that most GM earn his rating not just because they win a lot, but also because their ability to convert a lost position into a draw (or even a win).