To the end of the middle game my opponent was severely down on material, and had I been in that position I would perhaps have offered a draw and if declined would likely have resigned.
Am I the only one who thinks that this makes no sense at all?
Resigning as a beginner in rapid/blitz is arguably sandbagging. Being able to finish off a game is a skill that is still in question into the low 1000s, especially under time pressure. I keep being told that a good way to improve is to play better players. Not trying to claw out a swindle is leaving points on the table and a lower rating makes it harder to get games against better players.
Plus learning how to increase chances of a stalemate seems to me good board vision practice.
Knowing when to resign is something I think we as beginners need to learn.
In this game (I played Black) my opponent began with a wayward queen attack which I fended off very well and had a good opening and early middle game. I did miss about four opportunities to checkmate in the middle game according to the computer afterwards. But hey ho.
To the end of the middle game my opponent was severely down on material, and had I been in that position I would perhaps have offered a draw and if declined would likely have resigned.
I blundered my last rook towards the end when my opponent only had a King on the board. But I still had a significant amount of material compared to him. After I promoted my first pawn to a queen my opponent offered a draw which I declined as I was again far ahead in material and very soon would arrive at checkmate (being careful not to draw by stalemate).
My opponent then for some reason just let his/her clock run down and I won on time.
I found it odd as I believe my opponent should've resigned much earlier.
What do you think?
I went to inspect the losses of your opponent.
I was surprised with the result. In your game against your opponent, your opponent had 16 minutes and 50 seconds left and the game was won by timeout. However, in your opponent's game against another player rated close to 500, he lost due to abandonment after he had 19 minutes and 29 seconds on the clock.
Your opponent does have the right to play on, but in my opinion it's very unsportsmanlike for him to offer a draw in a severely losing position and to let the clock run out. Normally when I face such opponents, I ignore or block them, but on days which I am moody, I sometimes report them.
I was just trying to work out what my opponent was thinking/doing? By letting the clock run down he lost on time the same as if he had resigned. I just didn't see the point of that.
They want to make you suffer. That's pretty much it. I'd just be happy for the free rating points :>
Yeah, report the stallers that run clock out of spite. In some cases they are automatically reported (if they leave the site) but in others they aren't and reporting them can establish a pattern of behavior and make it impossible for the staller to claim it was an innocent mistake or whatever.
I was just trying to work out what my opponent was thinking/doing? By letting the clock run down he lost on time the same as if he had resigned. I just didn't see the point of that.
They want to make you suffer. That's pretty much it. I'd just be happy for the free rating points :>
I guess he was thinking I'd either offer a draw or resign. I'm glad of the points.
To the end of the middle game my opponent was severely down on material, and had I been in that position I would perhaps have offered a draw and if declined would likely have resigned.
Am I the only one who thinks that this makes no sense at all?
What I mean is, had I been in my opponents position I may have offered a draw the same as he did. Had that draw been rejected (as it was by me) I would've resigned.
I know I've pointed out the missed mates and later blunders but up around move 21 or 22 I was very much winning the game.
To the end of the middle game my opponent was severely down on material, and had I been in that position I would perhaps have offered a draw and if declined would likely have resigned.
Am I the only one who thinks that this makes no sense at all?
What I mean is, had I been in my opponents position I may have offered a draw the same as he did. Had that draw been rejected (as it was by me) I would've resigned.
I know I've pointed out the missed mates and later blunders but up around move 21 or 22 I was very much winning the game.
There is no reason to offer a draw in a completely losing position besides making a joke or trolling. There is also no reason to accept a draw in a completely winning position. Letting the clock run down at the end instead of resigning is very bad behavior.
To the end of the middle game my opponent was severely down on material, and had I been in that position I would perhaps have offered a draw and if declined would likely have resigned.
Am I the only one who thinks that this makes no sense at all?
What I mean is, had I been in my opponents position I may have offered a draw the same as he did. Had that draw been rejected (as it was by me) I would've resigned.
I know I've pointed out the missed mates and later blunders but up around move 21 or 22 I was very much winning the game.
There is no reason to offer a draw in a completely losing position besides making a joke or trolling. There is also no reason to accept a draw in a completely winning position. Letting the clock run down at the end instead of resigning is very bad behavior.
This. Your opponent has every right to play on and many GMs and IMs teach students to never resign for many many reasons. I would say that it is much less acceptable to offer a draw in a lost position and then resign if they decline. Again though, it is your right to do so.
If your a beginner than you shouldn't resign because the other person could blunder a piece.
To the end of the middle game my opponent was severely down on material, and had I been in that position I would perhaps have offered a draw and if declined would likely have resigned.
Am I the only one who thinks that this makes no sense at all?
What I mean is, had I been in my opponents position I may have offered a draw the same as he did. Had that draw been rejected (as it was by me) I would've resigned.
I know I've pointed out the missed mates and later blunders but up around move 21 or 22 I was very much winning the game.
There is no reason to offer a draw in a completely losing position besides making a joke or trolling. There is also no reason to accept a draw in a completely winning position. Letting the clock run down at the end instead of resigning is very bad behavior.
If you are uncertain of your analysis, or if you think your opponent may not have seen everything, then I can understand offering a draw in that situation followed by resigning once your opponent has demonstrated (by rejecting the offer) that your analysis is correct and the opponent understands the position.
If your a beginner than you shouldn't resign because the other person could blunder a piece.
That applies if you opponent is a beginner. If your opponent is not a beginner then you should have some time of plan to fight back. Against another expert I once blew a piece for a pawn in the opening and then proceeded to play it out using every trick I could think of. I always had some plan, regardless of how much it depended on the opponent missing some subtlety. Finally around Plan K a position was reached where I could sacrifice my extra pawn to reach a K+B vs K endgame and draw. If I had no potential counterplay I would have resigned.
If your opponent does not want to resign this position, you should challenge yourself to get 4 queens without a stalemate, or quickly checkmate with 2 queens in as few moves as possible. Everyone should have the chance to practice swindling lost games of creating a stalemate as well. Have fun.
That would be ok if the opponent is still making moves. In this case he simply let his clock run down. I couldn't do anything. I really would have preferred him to play on if he wasn't going to resign.
I could've blundered into a stalemate, but that's something neither of us will ever know.
running out time is not okay but other then that it is up to them. Your opponent might think oh they might stalemate me.. true. but in the long run that 1/2 doesn't make them any better of a player, relies on you making a mistake, and has no particular influence on their ability so it matters not at all if it turns out a 0 or a 1/2. so I recommend resign. but running time out/ closing app is unsportsmanlike.