Actually, the proper response is the checkmate the opponent in the most efficient manner possibly. The fact that a player thinks he is entitled to a resignation reflects poorly on that player.
What to do if they don't resign
Sort:
EricFleet wrote:
The fact that a player thinks he is entitled to a resignation reflects poorly on that player.
According to you, anyway.
Sep 8, 2012
0
#24
I should change my name to NeverResign. Yesterday in a 5/0 I blundered myself into a lost ending where I had a 2 to 1 pawn majority on Qside, 3 on 3 pawns Kside, and my king and B against opponent's K, R, and B.
BUT.. I noticed my opponent only had 1:10 to my 2:30. So I began doing everything I could to avoid trading Bs, avoid mate, hang onto a few pawns, and generally complicate thing as much as possible.
So my opponent obviously saw no humour at all in this. About 5 moves into my strategy he typed in the chat "are you serious?" I never missed a beat. I typed right back "totally"
I continued on avoiding trades and mate, complicating and moving quickly until he just couldn't engineer a simplification and lost on time.
Did I feel guilty?..........No
________________Chess is war_____________
Well, it's war for geeks maybe.
EricFleet wrote:
Actually, the proper response is the checkmate the opponent in the most efficient manner possibly. The fact that a player thinks he is entitled to a resignation reflects poorly on that player.
If people want to play out hopeless games then their opponents can finish them off any way they choose.
EnterTheDragon wrote:
I should change my name to NeverResign. Yesterday in a 5/0 I blundered myself into a lost ending where I had a 2 to 1 pawn majority on Qside, 3 on 3 pawns Kside, and my king and B against opponent's K, R, and B.
BUT.. I noticed my opponent only had 1:10 to my 2:30. So I began doing everything I could to avoid trading Bs, avoid mate, hang onto a few pawns, and generally complicate thing as much as possible.
So my opponent obviously saw no humour at all in this. About 5 moves into my strategy he typed in the chat "are you serious?" I never missed a beat. I typed right back "totally"
I continued on avoiding trades and mate, complicating and moving quickly until he just couldn't engineer a simplification and lost on time.
Did I feel guilty?..........No
________________Chess is war_____________
Really good strategy....if i were in your shoes i would do the same:)so don't feel guilty but proud that you found a winning strategy out of a lost(concerning the material)position
and when you're comfortably ahead in material, it's a great opportunity to play some sacrifices, combinations and tactics to keep yourself in trim (mooning is still viable though).
I would suggest analyzing the game and making the strongest move possible. Playing silly games, just makes the game last longer and alerts them to the fact that they have gotten under your skin.
What you should do depends on the time limits for the game. In a fast time limit your opponent has every right to keep on playing--to hope for a win on time.
Sometimes its fun to trap an opponents king in the corner, promote all your remaining pawns to knights and then give mate with said knights.:D
Trolling or are you unable to checkmate?
Something else fun is to take your opponents base by moving your king to their kings starting square.
Added bonus if you say 'I haz ur base' or some other variant.
quickly checkmate them. save some time
I agree with JoseO, and I think it's the best post on this theme.
Furthermore, I think that a losing side shouldnt resing because of folowing reasons:
1) He/she is losing so its good to practice defense in inferior situation.
2) The winner is the one who checkmates!!!
P.S. Interesting fact: During my play here I noticed that allmost all the time when oponent is forcing (at least rook down) time victory the oposing nation is US citizen ;)
P.S.S. I'd equalize this behaviour with cheaters in games. They can't stand to lose... :D
I have had people expect me to resign before. Sometimes I resign, sometimes I like the challenge of being down in material and play on. I believe I have that right as being the only other player in the game. If someone wants to negate the rules and "expect" a player to resign at a certain point, then they should state that before making their first move.
If people were forced to resign when down in material or in seemingly losing positions, then we wouldn't have those great Paul Morphy games to study as he would have had to resign numerous times.
Interestingly enough (it is to me at least) I once had an opponent that got angry with me when I did resign in losing positions. You never know who you are going to play here...
Some people say that chess is a sport. If so, than resigning the game sucks! That's like you play basketball and in half-time your team is 20 points down, and you say "let's just surrender, we don't have a chance!" Game is not over until time expires no matter how bad you losing the game. It's an unwritten rule in the spirit of sport. If you made mistake, that doesn't mean that your opponent can't do the same.
Normally, it they do not resign, you have the right to kill them. I remember this from my army days.
The only useful suggestion in this whole spew.