What?
ahhhh he resigned
Sort:
XJSOX wrote: never resign... its just saying i cant compete with you, rather than you beat me
gateman234 wrote:
why resign you can allways play it out for a draw?
look at this game, i played black. feel free to leave coments on the game and also please explain the point of resigning.
And what do you do when you're not playing chess? Burn ants with a magnifying glass?
Your opponent had the good grace to resign and should not be critisised for doing so.
Jan 17, 2008
0
#44
Blackadder wrote:
The problem I have with people not resigning is the bitter fustration that losing a game you most definatly should have won...
I just get bored with games I am totally winning, as they offer no stimulating challenge what-so-ever. -- this is when you make mistakes, and end up losing/drawing.
a game on here recently, I "sacrificed" the queen for 3 peices and a passed pawn, spend the next 20 or so moves trying to promote it and then bam!
I fall into a very simple mate trap, a trap which I shouldn't have fooled for, and a trap i could have stopped at any moment....sigh.
truth is, if you play me you should never resign, if you play on chances are you will quite literally, bore me to defeat.
This actually happened to me on the board...Playing blitz against a guy with NO ONE WAITING FOR A GAME..So no matter who wins or loses you stay. I go up 2 rooks and the guy only has 2 bishops but plays on. I am bored out of my mind so miss a simple discovered check and he takes my king. Wow, that was fun. I won the game and then you bored me to death and you learned that you can take the king if I don't move it. What a fun learning experience. Needless to say I never play with this patzer anymore.
Resigning is an individual thing. If I think I can't win and dragging on the game is simply a waste of both our time, then I will resign, but if I think I can learn something by continuing then I will carry on. Purely a matter for the individual, surely, and that's not being disrespectful to anyone.
Jan 18, 2008
0
#46
excalibur8 wrote: Resigning is an individual thing. If I think I can't win and dragging on the game is simply a waste of both our time, then I will resign, but if I think I can learn something by continuing then I will carry on. Purely a matter for the individual, surely, and that's not being disrespectful to anyone.
I think this is the best answer to this topic. Chess is not only about winning or ending up drawn a lost position. It's more on learning and having fun. If you have fun playing a positionally lost game, so be it. you can continue. As to gateman234, I think posting this game was not a very good idea. You could have discussed this topic without posting this game or atleast without naming your opponent. but anyway, I learned thanks to everyone who posted. I love this site.
I think this is the best answer to this topic. Chess is not only about winning or ending up drawn a lost position. It's more on learning and having fun. If you have fun playing a positionally lost game, so be it. you can continue. As to gateman234, I think posting this game was not a very good idea. You could have discussed this topic without posting this game or atleast without naming your opponent. but anyway, I learned thanks to everyone who posted. I love this site.
erikido23 wrote: Blackadder wrote:
The problem I have with people not resigning is the bitter fustration that losing a game you most definatly should have won...
I just get bored with games I am totally winning, as they offer no stimulating challenge what-so-ever. -- this is when you make mistakes, and end up losing/drawing.
a game on here recently, I "sacrificed" the queen for 3 peices and a passed pawn, spend the next 20 or so moves trying to promote it and then bam!
I fall into a very simple mate trap, a trap which I shouldn't have fooled for, and a trap i could have stopped at any moment....sigh.
truth is, if you play me you should never resign, if you play on chances are you will quite literally, bore me to defeat.
This actually happened to me on the board...Playing blitz against a guy with NO ONE WAITING FOR A GAME..So no matter who wins or loses you stay. I go up 2 rooks and the guy only has 2 bishops but plays on. I am bored out of my mind so miss a simple discovered check and he takes my king. Wow, that was fun. I won the game and then you bored me to death and you learned that you can take the king if I don't move it. What a fun learning experience. Needless to say I never play with this patzer anymore.
Two bishops can provide good protection and tactical traps. You had a strong advantage, materially. I wouldn't say that he had a hopeless position, just based on that, though.
ive read the majority of comments here....there is a point where, when the game is hopeless, and you just out of stubbornness or arrogance or simply underestimating your opponents skills when you play out a done game. sometimes we dont play enough endgames and dont get that experience, pawn and king play, which might help hone our general skills, so depending on the level of play and experience on either side, it may be a good thing to play these things out to the end, as it may equip the average player with the experiences that may round out his overall skills.....just food for thought.........
johnglider22 wrote: ive read the majority of comments here....there is a point where, when the game is hopeless, and you just out of stubbornness or arrogance or simply underestimating your opponents skills when you play out a done game. sometimes we dont play enough endgames and dont get that experience, pawn and king play, which might help hone our general skills, so depending on the level of play and experience on either side, it may be a good thing to play these things out to the end, as it may equip the average player with the experiences that may round out his overall skills.....just food for thought.........
Yeah I agree
Took you nearly 10 years though 
Maybe I was not clear enough.
He checkmated me. The point I wanted to make is, that he did not get his point easy. If he had made a mistake it would be stale mate. therefore, resigning in this case would not be a good idea because I could earn a 1/2 instead of 0.
But this depends on the opponent. A very good player like the grand master level will not make a mistake. Besides that, in a battle of two grand masters each player knows that losing a queen or maybe a rook is enough to lose. I think, that's why they resign earlier.
I'm playing two games.I've not been here for a long time