When is the best moment to resign?

I once knew a guy who would resign when he was one move away from being checkmated. I once saw an opponent fill in the checkmating move on his scoresheet and the guy pestered him to change the record to reflect the pre-checkmate resignation.

for me is when I need my opponent to blunder in order to come back. there is no point playing after such a moment and all reasons mentioned in similar threads and here, are to me just excuses to try to hold on the few rating points you are about to lose
just resign and try harder in next

never because you will learn as you get beat, like in end games etc
that is the excuse beginners use to be a jerk. Once the game is lost, it is over so resign it like a chess player.
who are you calling a jerk,

never because you will learn as you get beat, like in end games etc
that is the excuse beginners use to be a jerk. Once the game is lost, it is over so resign it like a chess player.
I agree. Once the game is lost (checkmate) then it's time to resign. Resigning before then is really up to the player because so often a mate in one for whatever reason does not happen. After the game is lost, or over, then resigning makes sense.

after your opponent checkmates you.
Seriously (and I truly mean no offense by this statement), at your rating level I would not be too quick to resign any game. Especially at fast time controls. There are simply too many time-related blunders. you might find by playing on, that the tables suddenly turn and your opponent makes a mistake.
Another word or advice, if you are down material - try hard to avoid trading any more pieces off. This makes the win easier and easier for your opponent. There will simply be less to look at each and every move. IF you can keep a knight on the board, even at the cost of some material - try to do so. Those clever little beasts have a trick movement pattern and can fork two pieces and create total mayhem. It is maddening to have to deal with that possibility on every turn if you are the one that is ahead.
Oh, and many won games are also spoiled by stalemate and end up as a draw. so play on and make yourself as tough to defeat as possible.
Good luck and happy hunting my friend!

never because you will learn as you get beat, like in end games etc
that is the excuse beginners use to be a jerk. Once the game is lost, it is over so resign it like a chess player.
I agree. Once the game is lost (checkmate) then it's time to resign. Resigning before then is really up to the player because so often a mate in one for whatever reason does not happen. After the game is lost, or over, then resigning makes sense.
You cannot resign in checkmate. The game is over. There is nothing to concede.

Yes, I agree.
Today only, I won a game in which I was 4 pawns and 1 rook down. You can resign when your opponent has a lot of material [queen, rook, 2 passer pawns etc.] and you have only a king or a bishop or knight with it.
I also agree

never because you will learn as you get beat, like in end games etc
that is the excuse beginners use to be a jerk. Once the game is lost, it is over so resign it like a chess player.
I agree. Once the game is lost (checkmate) then it's time to resign. Resigning before then is really up to the player because so often a mate in one for whatever reason does not happen. After the game is lost, or over, then resigning makes sense.
You cannot resign in checkmate. The game is over. There is nothing to concede.
I thought it was obvious, but that's the point. Only after checkmate is resigning a good option. So many people say resign when the game is "lost". Well, I agree. When the game is over, or lost, THAT is the time to concede. Not a moment earlier.

No need to resign even when you have 1 or 2 pawns against a rook as if you make your king and pawns together in unity, no one can stop you from winning or drawing [in some cases].

An appropriate time to resign is when you realize you’re screwed. You’re down pieces and your position isn’t stable.

Yesterday I had a game where I had a king and two pawns, the opponent had a rook, two pawns, two queens, and still could not win. So he promoted another pawn. Now three queens, a rook, and a pawn vs. my king and two immovable pawns. Still not enough to win. With that kind of disadvantage, and a checkmate in one multiple times, if that's not a "dead lost" position what is?
And did you escape with half a point? If you did, could you post a link to the game? That sounds interesting.

Yesterday I had a game where I had a king and two pawns, the opponent had a rook, two pawns, two queens, and still could not win. So he promoted another pawn. Now three queens, a rook, and a pawn vs. my king and two immovable pawns. Still not enough to win. With that kind of disadvantage, and a checkmate in one multiple times, if that's not a "dead lost" position what is?
And did you escape with half a point? If you did, could you post a link to the game? That sounds interesting.
Yes, we both got half a point. I dont know if I can post it, it was elsewhere. But the almost same thing happened again about 5 games ago. Only this time it was two queens and a couple other pieces against just my lone king. Stalemate again. It always amazes me how often that happens. It happens so often that I find it's always worth playing it out to checkmate (or stalemate or time running out). That's why I never resign under any chess related circumstances.

Yesterday I had a game where I had a king and two pawns, the opponent had a rook, two pawns, two queens, and still could not win. So he promoted another pawn. Now three queens, a rook, and a pawn vs. my king and two immovable pawns. Still not enough to win. With that kind of disadvantage, and a checkmate in one multiple times, if that's not a "dead lost" position what is?
And did you escape with half a point? If you did, could you post a link to the game? That sounds interesting.
Yes, we both got half a point. I dont know if I can post it, it was on lichess. But the almost same thing happened again about 5 games ago. Only this time it was two queens and a couple other pieces against just my lone king. Stalemate again. It always amazes me how often that happens. It happens so often that I find it's always worth playing it out to checkmate (or stalemate or time running out). That's why I never resign under any chess related circumstances.
Wow!! I can understand low rated players struggling to press home such a large advantage but you've got a decent rating and yet they turned you over but couldn't finish you with 2 Q and a R?? Sounds like they cheated to gain the large advantage but tried to finish you on their own but couldn't.