When to resign - Etiquette - An honest appeal

Etiquette in OTB which is played with an audience in the playing room and etiquette in a lone room whose name is usually unknown are two different things.

I would like an opponent to resign in a clearly lost and technically easy finale here, but I no longer expect it when the maxim "No-one ever won by resigning" is quoted so regularly.

Etiquette went out with Knives and Forks I am sorry to say.

I think it is number 1,

And 2

And 3.

Just yesterday I played a game where, entering middle game I was in a strong position. Two dopey moves and I was clearly losing by the time we were in end game.

My opponent made his own blunder and ... I won.

I never thought losing was a sure thing, so I didn't resign.

You should only reason when you know your opponent knows how to win. Yet you didn't know how to win but is angry at your opponent for rightfully playing to the end. Not up for thinking isn't even an excuse because K+R vs K doesn't even require any thinking.

There's no question that to "resign or not resign" is a complicated and very nuanced subject. However I believe that there are moments in which resigning on a "karmic" level is best. What do I mean? 

As I write this I'm in a game with someone it's my K+R+6p vs his lonely K.  See Diagram: I hope I'm doing this right.

I can promote a pawn in 4 moves but potentially i could be waiting a long time.

4 moves times 3 days per move. Equals 12 days, .........What say ye!?

We shouldn't be commenting on a game still being played.

Just like the jews jkjk

LOL but seriously that's a pretty rude joke (and the Jews were sent to gas chambers btw)

OP either thinks they're doing some clever trolling or they're completely effing insane. This is the second post in two weeks that they've complained like this. The first time I was convinced by OP and others that they were serious, but no one, and I mean NO ONE, is this stupid. To think OP genuinely believes it's not their duty to convert what they call a "winning endgame" (which obviously isn't winning if they can't convert one of the most basic endgames), but that their opponent should "just resign" is mind blowing to me. It's literally the aim of the game.

@wornaki, why should your opponent give you a free win without making you prove that you have the technique to win, especially at your level? Take 5 minutes to learn the endgame and stop with these pathetic cries for attention ffs.

I think it is annoying for players that have completely winning positions for their opponents not to resign. It will happen so get used to it. I feel the same way but they do have a right to do so

I know you werent trying to be rude.....but its still very rude.

Agreed. I can respect them not resigning, but that doesn't mean I have to like it.

Playing for tricks in a losing position is a skill as well. If you resign when you blunder a piece without even trying to swindle, you will be a worse player in the long run. One time I was a piece and a pawn down, my opponent had a knight, a bishop and a pawn. I sacrificed the piece for a pawn as we were both around 1 200-1 300 at the time. That is a lost endgame, but of course he didn't know how to convert. I still haven't learned that checkmate. On the other hand I had a queen for a knight in the endgame (I was in the same rating range), and I was wondering if I could win the position. The opponent flat out resigned and I believe I had around 30% practical chance at that point to win because that ending can be tricky. 

And those are more clear cut examples where you might resign. But a piece or even a rook down when there are many pieces left... you shouldn't resign right away for sure. You may choose to do so later on when the position is more clear cut, but even then, you don't have to.

Amazing post. Your opponent did the right thing, clearly.

Yeah, I mean if he didn't manage to win, it is even more justified, not the other way around.

True

Brief resurrection of this thread by OP. I just blocked my latest opponent, after he confirmed he is the non resigner type. The game that prompted my block was this:

https://chess.com/live/game/5846894777

Next time in find myself in this situation, I will resign myself, send a message (if chat is enabled) saying how disrespectful this is and immediately block them. I wish there was a way to know disrespectful people before playing them. It would make my chess life much easier.

Also, before you tell me (once again) to learn to mate with R and K, I block on principle. If you're the non resigner type, I don't want to play you (unless I know you somehow or the setting is official competition). Life's too short to deal with that kind of chess player. I encourage you ask to do the same with non resigners of the stubborn ilk. Don't let your chess life be filled with people who have such a distorted view of a game.

This game proved that he shouldn't resign. It proved that you should work a bit on basic checkmates. 

I'm entitled to blocking them for being obnoxious. End of story.