When to resign - Etiquette - An honest appeal

Also, nice rook and king mate, for whatever's worth it.

He played a turd of a game, didn't capitalize by taking control of the centre of the board while his opponent stuffed around on the outer, and then blamed his opponent for his loss on how they played, enough said ..

Your opponent has the right to play whatever he/she wants. They can hang their queen. They can play this offbeat gambit line. They can play 2. Ke2 the bongcloud. They can play whatever they want, if they play something bad, you need to punish them, unlike what you did in that game.

A "side effect"...that's the intended result of playing that way. And, of course, you play a3 b4 because you have done extensive analysis and think it's a great line, right?

@GothamChess beat a SuperGM with the a3 Sicilian

They can play whatever they want. I'll just block those who, in my opinion, just play that way to annoy their opponent. I don't care about the result of the game or whether or not I "learn" anything from the game. I consider it a breach of the kind of respect I deserve as a player. Playing that way basically shows that, according to them, I don't deserve their best. Well, if I don't deserve their best, they don't deserve playing me.

You know early on in this thread I kind of understood your point of resigning when the game was lost, I didn't agree with it, but I understood your point. That's now digressed into you dictating how your opponents will play against you and calling out or even blocking those who don't play that way, and that's just plain wrong.

So long as a player is playing within the rules who cares how they play, that's entirely up to them, and how you respond is entirely up to you,

You've been totally lost in some games, why didn't you resign?

They can play WHATEVER THEY WANT. You can't control that, so go on with life

The reason I brought the style of play into the fold is simple. I happen to think that the broad term etiquette encompasses playing your best against your opponents. Then again, from my point of view, if you play a certain way, you aren't playing your best and/or you're playing merely to annoy your opponent. That's etiquette to me too. The minute I see people my level playing that way OTB, even in blitz, I'll change my mind. I'll take a seat while I wait.

What if they just played an offbeat opening to confuse you and try to get an advantage?

Perhaps @phanindraparashar had been following this thread and thought he could gain a psychological advantage. According to his game explorer he has never before played 1.a5 or 1.h5 against any first move by white, nor has he ever played 1.a4 or 1.h4 with white. 

Maybe

Maybe he read this thread, maybe he was told by others about it. Maybe he just felt like playing that way. Who knows and who cares? Certainly not me. He got his win. Kudos to him.

He also has only faced 1.c4 one time so it is possible that he was very unfamiliar and decided to play something random which would mean that you were both in unfamiliar territory. A perfectly valid strategy I might add, notwithstanding that 1.a5 is a poor choice. 

NATURALLY?! are u ok in the head

Want an example of an annoying player? Here: @wornaki 

If you think I'm annoying, you can always block me. It's only a couple of clicks away.

@strangemover unfamiliar territory is a good phrase. Very apt. If only I could believe that he decided to play a5 because he didn't know what else to do... *eyeroll*

"I could've mated the guy, but I wasn't up for thinking"