When to draw/resign - A question of etiquette

Hi all, new here. I've know how the pieces move since childhood, never actually studied the game yet, but want to now.

I had a game where it came down to my king + queen, vs his king. My opponent immediately offered a draw, and I accepted. I figured maybe it was one of those situations where it would take forever and we'd just be chasing around the board, but on looking at it more, it seems like king + queen vs king should be pretty easy to close out.

In the past I got pretty into starcraft2. In that game it's quite rude to force an opponent to completely defeat you. At some point, it becomes clear who has won, and the loser graciously "taps out".

My question is this, what situations typically warrant a voluntary draw and/or resignation, if any? Do I stick it out if it's king+rook vs king, king+bishop vs king, etc. What situations would it be rude to force an opponent to play out, are there set conventions around this. I don't want to be rude, but I'd also rather not accept draws when I'm clearly at an advantage. Thanks in advance!

resigning is basically saying to your opponent "I think you are good enough to win this game so I give up" if you dont think your opponent can win the game from the position then dont resign or you think there is a chance they will blunder then keep playing.

Until you know it yourself, never resign. And do not accept a draw either, unless you feel you are beat, or absolutely sure the best you can get is a draw.

Q+K vs K when you have Q+K is probably one of the most basic wins there is in chess. The only chance the weaker side has is stalemate (=draw) and that is easily avoided.

Okay, thanks for the responses. That makes sense, I just wanted to make sure I wasn't breaking any norms by declining draws in specific endgame scenarios.

Offering a draw when it's King versus King+Queen when you are about to time out is a nice thing to do, but not needed. Offering it to avoid a obvious defeat is poor etiquette on their part. If you can see a draw is bound to happen (King+Rook verus King+Rook) then accept; if you can't see why it's a draw then play on to find out.

In terms of resigning lost positions, below 1000 I wouldn't bother. Stalemate is very common and you are doing your opponent a favour by creating them - they need to learn how to avoid blundering a stalemate. At lower levels, when people have learnt those lessons, it can be good to resign. But whilst you are learning and gaining experience you need to play endgames to understand endgames.

When I play a lost position I do it with dignity. I make moves fairly fast rather than dragging out the game needlessly by slow play. If the opponent shares that, it's just playing out a situation quite quickly. Often, I find my opponent blunders to let me back in. I won a game yesterday (against a 850-ish player) when I had considered resigning. Until you have a 1000+ rating (at least), there's no certainty of losing any game.

Here is an example from today of winning through failing to resign, against a 900 player.

Black move 38 is checkmate if they move Queen to e7. They never, so I moved my rook to e8 to prevent being mated next move. They never noticed the threat of rook to e1, so prepared for mate in 1, unaware I could get there first. So I got a very undeserved victory, and my opponent got a lesson in why to study the board even when clearly ahead.

These endgames are won, if played properly:

1. K+Q vs K
2. K+R vs K
3. K+B+B vs K
4. K+B+N vs K

These endgames are drawn... no win can be forced:

1. K+N+N vs K
2. K+B vs K
3. K+N vs K

If any Pawns remain on the board, that can change the outcome since Pawns can promote.

Offer a draw ONLY when you think the game is equal. If your opponent offers a draw and you're winning, DO NOT accept; otherwise you can accept if you want to.

NEVER resign, period. That's all there is to it.

I am sure GM Ben Finegold says never offer or accept a draw and never resign. Play out the position. The idea is to increase your experience in defending bad positions, thus improving your ability as you have a broader base to learn from. Also your oponent has to prove they know how to win or draw the position. It is a learning oportunity and thinking practice. Play without tilt, every turn what is the best move. Others may not like it but that isn't your problem, you are playing to win or improve.

"I had a game where it came down to my king + queen, vs his king. My opponent immediately offered a draw, and I accepted. I figured maybe it was one of those situations where it would take forever and we'd just be chasing around the board, "

K and Q against K is not too hard a win. Whatever side of the board their K is on-just move the Queen so it puts their K in a box- don't put them in check, just make it so they can't use the file, or rank that your Q is on -they must move the K again, so move the Q in closer, so the box gets smaller. Do this until the K is very restricted in it's allowed moves. Like maybe 2 or 3 allowable moves, then bring in your K to 'protect' your Q while putting them in mate.

Don't get carried away making the box to small-or you end up in stalemate/draw.

Welcome to the game of chess!

For me, there are many factors which leads me to decide whether to resign or continue in a losing position.

.

1. Opponent's rating. If I blunder a rook against @Chess_Player_lol or @blueemu, I am likely to resign. If I blunder a rook against a 500 rated player, I will likely play on.

.

2. Any chance of mounting a comeback. If I am still able to generate chances, I will play on. Otherwise, I will resign. This is because there is almost no point in dragging a lost game - I could use the time saved to start a new game or run other non-chess errands.

.

3. Any chance of stalemate - although I have not used this to great effect.

.

4. The importance of the game (with mixed decisions). I had one here where I didn't resign https://www.chess.com/forum/view/game-analysis/dramatic-turn-of-tides-in-the-middle-of-an-online-tournament although it was just an online Chess.com tournament and an old over-the-board tournament in which I hung a knight in a completely unforced error against a player 150 rating points above me in the final round and I resigned.

.

5. My mood - sometimes, I feel like playing on for that day.

You're mixing up two totally different things ... resigning in a lost position and accepting a draw.

Also, accepting a draw when you have K+Q v K is extraordinarily poor judgment ... why would you do such a thing? Crack open a book, any book, on chess.

Accept a draw if you can't see any chances of you winning or you think you have too big a risk of losing. Accept a draw if you were thinking of offering one yourself.

And if you care about etiquette, please ignore the fish saying to never resign ... resign if you know how your opponent will win and you see virtually no chance of another outcome short of them having a heart attack. If you have a K against your opponent's K+P and you can't stop the pawn, then resign ... offering a draw, as your opponent did, is extremely rude.

...or in the case of K + N + N against K (+ P), the extra pawn can assist in stopping a stalemate defence from occurring.

Been playing for about a week on this app now and I'm seriously fed up with players resigning prematurely, just because, for example, they lose their queen. Just check my recent wins, most of those games were far from finished. If you are reading this, whomever it may concern, please finish your games and resign only when you see no other option.

I don't think there's anything wrong with playing on in a lost position. Your opponent may stalemate, mouseslip, lose connection. I don't play on in hopeless games myself, but I have no issues if others want to.

What I dislike is people just refusing to move and running the clock out rather than resigning. This is childish and these players should be warned, and then removed.

This.

Except for a few time-outs while I was moving home from one town to another, every loss I have is by resignation. I never drag the game out once I'm clearly lost.

... but I don't complain if the opponent does. He can play on as long as he likes. Those are the rules of the game.

My question is how do people feel about draws due to repetition? I recently had a game where I was up in material but my opponent was in a decent position. I decided to perpetual check my opponent until a draw. Now, I was okay with the draw even though I was up in material, but I was wondering what other people thought about drawing due to repetition.

Draws by repetition are just as valid as any other outcome.

Even if it had been the opponent who was up in material, he has no right to object to the draw. If you have a perpetual check on the board in front of you, then the opponent ISN'T winning.

All he has is a draw.

Or, as the iconic Commander Peter Quincy Taggart says: "Never give up. Never surrender."