Forums

Resignation

IMakasu

I think there's a certain threshold that warrants a resignation. Like if you blunder your queen, might as well resign. If you only blunder a piece or a rook, there's no point in resigning. You'd still have lots of chances if you aren't already in the endgame

Paleobotanical
I don’t know, I have won games after blundering a queen. Depends on how late in the game it is and what’s going on. :)
AntiMustard
wornaki wrote:

I disagree. Resign when you are lost, unless you really want to see how your opponent mates you (if you can't see the mate yourself). Otherwise, if you know you're lost, please resign. Don't be a douche...

To all beginners, do not listen to this advice. You are not a douche if you want to continue playing because you are hoping for a come back, or just because you want to learn.

wornaki
AntiMustard wrote:
wornaki wrote:

I disagree. Resign when you are lost, unless you really want to see how your opponent mates you (if you can't see the mate yourself). Otherwise, if you know you're lost, please resign. Don't be a douche...

To all beginners, do not listen to this advice. You are not a douche if you want to continue playing because you are hoping for a come back, or just because you want to learn.

To all beginners, listen to that advice. Do as you wish, but beware that there are people who will consider you a douche if you don't resign when you KNOW you're lost.

AntiMustard

You only know you have lost when you are checkmated or flagged. And if you think someone is a douche because they do not want to give you a win for free, well, what does it say about you?

wornaki
AntiMustard wrote:

You only know you have lost when you are checkmated or flagged. And if you think someone is a douche because they do not want to give you a win for free, well, what does it say about you?

I like to think that it says that I'm not the type that tries to swindle as principle.

AntiMustard

I had "entitled" in mind

wornaki
AntiMustard wrote:

I had "entitled" in mind

*shrugs*

If people don't want to resign in positions they know lost just because they CAN play until flagging or getting checkmated, they can go ahead and do it. They are "entitled" to it. JUST as I'm "entitled" to consider them douches...

AntiMustard

So you consider all the top chess players douches? Because they will all play on in positions that are lost if they see practical chances. They'll try to swindle, trap, flag and what not. They will only resign if they see no practical chance of saving the game.

wornaki
AntiMustard wrote:

So you consider all the top chess players douches? Because they will all play on in positions that are lost if they see practical chances. They'll try to swindle, trap, flag and what not. They will only resign if they see no practical chance of saving the game.

Notice I said "know". Top players know very well when a position is totally lost. Also, I do consider some top chess level players leaning towards being douches. You won't see many of them doing that in serious competition (beyond online bullet or very fast chess).

AntiMustard

Top players indeed do know when the position is lost (way better than you and I will ever hope to do). But theoretically lost is not necessarily practically lost. A GM will only resign in the latter case.

You do not know much about top level chess if you think that elite players only try to win by any means possible in speed chess and do not do it in "serious" competitions.

AntiMustard

I think you are just one of those players who get frustrated when they loose a game they had thought they were going to win and instead of doing an adult thing (i.e. recognizing that their losing is entirely their own fault, and nobody's else, and going back to the game, analyzing it, identifying the errors and trying to learn from them) instead just blame the opponent for not resigning when they were "supposed" to.

wornaki
AntiMustard wrote:

I think you are just one of those players who get frustrated when they lose a game they had thought they were going to win and instead of doing an adult thing (i.e. recognizing that their loss is entirely their own fault, and nobody's else, and going back to the game, analyzing it, identifying the errors and trying to learn from them) instead just blame the opponent for not resigning when they were "supposed" to.

You can think so. Just as I can think that you're on of those players who derives pleasure from swindling opponents and then saying "You should never resign, so you get to be disrespectful to other players. Look at me!" We can think a lot of things about each other. That doesn't mean they are true.

Now... coming back to topic. I stand by my words. If you KNOW you're lost, then resigning is more reasonable than not resigning. As for when you KNOW you're lost, that's up to you and your knowledge and your conscience.

AntiMustard

> You can think so

Yes, that's what I think, let's leave it at that.

Also notice I never said: "You should never resign". I, in fact, resign very often. Hardly any of the games I lose end up in a checkmate or me losing on time.

> knowledge and your conscience

knowledge - yes, conscience has nothing to do with a decision to resign

> You should never resign, so you get to be disrespectful to other players

And again, it is so childish to suggest that if someone does not resign when you think they should, it is disrespectful.

redkitelantern

Funny, I am a beginner with a modest ELO, and the other day I made a silly mistake and loist my Queen cheaply. I was ready to resign but I thought I'd plough on.

Just_Joined_Now

For a beginner wanting to learn, I would not resign so that I can see until the end. If I can see how a checkmate will be in certain number of moves, then I will resign as there's nothing for me to learn. Speaking of resignation, I was automatically resigned because of my poor internet connection. I want to restore my points together with my opponent prior to our game. I find it unfair for my opponent who "lost" and I can't accept my "win".

Viznik
It’s a fair point, because even watching how your opponent goes about checkmating you can help improve your OWN endgame!
Novocastrian4

Some people may think it's expected of them. In this game, I was told by my opponent to resign when he was up 3 in material at about the 20th move. 

https://www.chess.com/live/game/7690314493

 

Elbow_Jobertski
redkitelantern wrote:

Funny, I am a beginner with a modest ELO, and the other day I made a silly mistake and loist my Queen cheaply. I was ready to resign but I thought I'd plough on.

I never resign live chess. If I played anything longer live than 10/0 I might consider it. 

I used to once in a while out of frustration due to a blunder but these threads and the idea that managing the emotional reaction to apparent hopelessness is a life skill have changed my mind. They can prove they can win, otherwise it wasn't a winning position in the first place seeing time is part of the game. The only ones that whine are those that have trouble methodically finishing. If I ever resign it is some real life event (important phone call, need to check on the kid, attacked by a werewolf, etc.) keeping me from giving the game the attention the position requires. 

When I see the "why don't you resign" stuff in chat I can look forward to an at best awkward conversion. 

On the other hand, in daily I will resign pretty freely. The nature of daily makes time pressure irrelevant and I only play tournaments so strategically it makes sense to not have an extra game to play. 

Paleobotanical
“I was told by my opponent to resign when he was up 3 in material at about the 20th move.”

My typical response when someone says that: “lol” and block chat.