When to resign - Etiquette - An honest appeal

Yep. 

What I find interesting is that people get all bent out of shape if others play the game exactly as it was intended to be played. The actual purpose of the game is checkmate. And yet there are people who feel slighted if they have to checkmate. I've always felt if someone strongly wants the other side to resign, put them in a position where they cannot resign, checkmate.  

lollolololololol

+1

#1256

Gata Kamsky not happy with etiquette levels here. 

Lmao. Such a sore loser in that video. Imagine signing up for a tournament, knowing the rules and time restraints and complaining at the end. He should just stick to classical with that mindset.

To be fair they played a rematch and at the start of that he apologised for his outburst. Although increments were added in the rematch so he got his way. 

Idk anything about that tournament. But in general, flagging is still a way to end, like it or not.

That's rapid and blitz for you. You can win when you lose, win when you draw, loose when you win, loose when you draw, it's a mixed up, muddled up, shook up game.

I once heard that in some countries it’s considered proper to resign after your queen is taken

Indeed. In other games, like league of legends, where you get an advantage in something, the opponent might as well resign. Because at higher levels they're so good at capitalizing on it, there's no point. But not in some random chess match. 

Sounds like you’re just mad because your opponent didn’t give you the win (as well he shouldn’t have) you didn’t deserve the win if you couldn’t checkmate, or as you claim “couldn’t be bothered”, you didn’t even care enough to checkmate him so why should you get an easy win? Your opponent deserved the draw for playing it out and not giving up on a game he could draw. There are no rules that say you should resign nor is there widely understood etiquette and frankly I think it does both parties a disservice to resign before positions are played out, I didn’t just do all that work on a position to have my opponent resign before it got to be played out, and my opponent didn’t just play an entire game just to lose some points and come away with no new information or without having maybe seen a flaw in my position he could exploit

Myself, I'm disappointed that my opponent DID give me the win, in my third-to-last game.

I had only a rook and he gave me the win.  

I behaved very differently in my most recent game when I was the one behind by a rook.  It stalemated after I continued on in a lost position (KR versus a lone K).

Notwithstanding what the original author of this thread posted, the fact remains that I earned the draw.  Because no chess rule required that I give up and take a loss.

 

Notice to all:

Don't even talk to the original poster of this thread, only leave posts about this topic for the rest of us, people have been receiving this notice:

"You have been blocked from posting by the topic creator."

Maybe if enough people report him for it might get a worthy change on this site,  Thread posters probably shouldn't be able to impede self-expression about a topic.

wornaki: so let me get this straight. you played someone who refused to resign and you were unable to beat him/her. so you blocked him/her after you drew. now you are out here preaching to everyone else that you may find yourself playing that they should resign if they find themselves materially or positionally down vs you? and you think this is on grounds of 'etiquette?' is that about right?

edit: wornaki blocked me from making any additional posts to this thread one minute after i posted. i guess he just gets frustrated with having the entire world disagree with his viewpoint while literally not one person agrees with him over the course of months. dude, can you seriously not grasp that you are in the wrong here?

hmmmm

Right, all bets are off with super-fast time limits.

I have now come across at least four opponents who resigned when they shouldn’t have. So I would encourage players to fight out until the very end, if only as a learning experience.

I’m just getting into chess again and to be quite honest I never thought about this resigning or not resigning situation being such an etiquette topic. I appreciate both sides talking about it to a great extent in order to understand why some players might get frustrated while at the same time realize that players are 100% entitled to keeping the game going.

I have had games where I dominate the entire game and make a blunder at the last second and get a draw. I have also done it myself to another player. I have had lots of players resigning too quickly when they were in a better position than me. Forcing a draw is an art form and you can't practise this art if you keep resigning. I have no problem with players who don't resign. On a very rare occasion I have become bored and restless and just resigned a easily winning position because I wanted to do something else. Its all part of the game.

Chess is like war. If you’ve ever seen the movie, 300, in the end Leonidus (the king of Sparta) is surrounded and outnumbered by the Persian army. With no way out, except for surrender, Leonidus and his handful of soldiers fight to their deaths.

Even if winning is not feasible, resigning is a sign of a quitter. Besides, there have been instances where I was losing significantly but my opponent ran out of time. Or the game was drawn by stale mate.