I did not resign because I lost a Rook. I resigned because I was going to lose my other Rook, and my position was clearly lost to a much better opponent.
As per my post above your position was clearly not lost, you just didn't bother to look for it.
As for your other question, within the last week in 2 tournament games against the same player I blundered my way down to just the king (actually near the end I sacrificed my other pieces intentionally to just have the king), the 1st game I was able to force a stalemate, in the 2nd game they were much more cautious and checkmated me.
You might argue I was delaying ending the game, but put simply I was learning from the experience, and clearly they were too because they changed end game tactics the 2nd time to ensure they didn't stalemate me again, and we were both active enough players to finish both our matching games before other pairings in the tournament have finished their first.
EDIT> Here's the tournament >> https://www.chess.com/tournament/premium-beginners-slow-tourney
As of right now they are in position 1 and I'm in 2.
I just watched a 2835 rated IM hang his Rook in a completely even endgame, and he resigned.
As is his/her right. The argument isn't never resign, the argument is that your opponent doesn't have the right to tell you when to quit and that there are numerous benefits to not resigning (drawing/winning games, becoming a better defensive player, etc).
If you can point me to where I said a person does not have the right to resign, I’d appreciate it. I never said anything along those lines.
I did not resign because I lost a Rook. I resigned because I was going to lose my other Rook, and my position was clearly lost to a much better opponent.
As per my post above your position was clearly not lost, you just didn't bother to look for it.
As for your other question, within the last week in 2 tournament games against the same player I blundered my way down to just the king (actually near the end I sacrificed my other pieces intentionally to just have the king), the 1st game I was able to force a stalemate, in the 2nd game they were much more cautious and checkmated me.
You might argue I was delaying ending the game, but put simply I was learning from the experience, and clearly they were too because they changed end game tactics the 2nd time to ensure they didn't stalemate me again, and we were both active enough players to finish both our matching games before other pairings in the tournament have finished their first.
EDIT> Here's the tournament >> https://www.chess.com/tournament/premium-beginners-slow-tourney
As of right now they are in position 1 and I'm in 2.
I just watched a 2835 rated IM hang his Rook in a completely even endgame, and he resigned.
As is his/her right. The argument isn't never resign, the argument is that your opponent doesn't have the right to tell you when to quit and that there are numerous benefits to not resigning (drawing/winning games, becoming a better defensive player, etc).