What's the point of chess if you resign?....what does that even mean?
You shouldn't be proud of your ridiculous I've never resigned bravado. Like it was mentioned above, sometimes you lose, accept it, learn from it, and stop dragging out a lost cause. (No I'm not talking about being down an exchange)
Tell me what the point of playing for your opponent blundering terribly into a stalemate, to save 12 points on your meaningless rating?
i'd say not resigning was unsportsmanlike. :)
i'm of this school too. not only unsporstmanlike but stupid... i must say.
that may be so but that is not the issue, of course your allowed to resign if you feel it good-sportsmanship but that is your choice and not mine I understand that but I always feel that resigning is just another word for surrender which I find repulsive if my oponent resigns in fact I feel it bad sports-manship to resign...
whats the point of chess if you resign? (in my opinion it is giving up!) I am proud of the fact that I have never resigned a rated game on chess.com throughout the time I have been on this site.I believe where there's a game there's a draw!
That is perfectly fine. However, then you can't complain when someone in a position like this promotes six knights, trying to form letter shapes on the board before mating you.
Of course it is giving up. The point is that you SHOULD give up sometimes. Or have your time wasted. Your choice.
Perhaps he didn't feel confident mating you with 3 queens? Remember to consider all sides of an argument!
i would have promoted the remaining two pawns too! this is just hilarious...:-)
that may be so but that is not the issue, of course your allowed to resign if you feel it good-sportsmanship but that is your choice and not mine I understand that but I always feel that resigning is just another word for surrender which I find repulsive if my oponent resigns in fact I feel it bad sports-manship to resign...
I see from your profile that you are a pro-boxer. I think that your attitude is completely appropriate for boxing–there's always the chance of coming back for a K.O. Chess isn't boxing, however, and resignation shows willingness to accept the reality of the board, because chess proceeds by a logical course and not chance, physical exhaustion, and surprise reserves of strength. If you have a single King and your opponent still has a board full of pawns you have no possibility of winning. None. At best you can hope your opponent screws up and allows the board to repeat itself 3 times or to pin you into a stalemate. You can resign and spend more time on improving to come back and challenge the person you just lost to. Resignation, when warranted, is perfectly honorable. It doesn't show a lack of stamina or mental weakness. It might in boxing, hockey, or horse racing, but not in chess.
i'd say not resigning was unsportsmanlike. :)
I wholeheartedly support this view. There are viewpoints, and viewpoints. If we hold one particular viewpoint (not resigning till mate) and want to justify it, we have no right to criticize another's viewpoint (those who does not timely resign should be taught a lesson).
I resign early in lost games (I think not to do so with a strong player is an insult - as if I am doubting his/her ability to win), but do not grudge if my opponent does not timely resign (I give them a sportsmanship trophy if they timely resign), and I do not think I have the right to demand a person to resign. Similarly when I offer draw, I do it only once - but if my opponent repeatedly offers draw in losing position, I simply ignore it, and try to finish the game ASAP (instead of trying to teach my opponent a lesson - it is my firm belief that 99% of people are eager to teach others lessons, but not at all prepared to learn some lessons themselves).
So it's better to move your king around the board like a homeless hobo then to say well done you your opponent and acknowledge that he/she beat you? BS.
exactly.
some people are too thick to see this. it makes me really sad actually. like someone who doesn't understand that the fast lane is really the fast lane. some people just don't get it.
I had up to five or six queens in one of my games; I don't remember. To be honest, it was not the same thing. The person who I was playing with had already lost the game, and we are good friends. I asked if it was ok for me to try to promote all the pawns I had to queens for fun. She was ok with it.
The main thing: Just have fun!
this isn't a in issue of fun or not fun. it's about being able to tell that no matter what you do you've lost and just resigning.
that may be so but that is not the issue, of course your allowed to resign if you feel it good-sportsmanship but that is your choice and not mine I understand that but I always feel that resigning is just another word for surrender which I find repulsive if my oponent resigns in fact I feel it bad sports-manship to resign...
I see from your profile that you are a pro-boxer. I think that your attitude is completely appropriate for boxing–there's always the chance of coming back for a K.O. Chess isn't boxing, however, and resignation shows willingness to accept the reality of the board, because chess proceeds by a logical course and not chance, physical exhaustion, and surprise reserves of strength. If you have a single King and your opponent still has a board full of pawns you have no possibility of winning. None. At best you can hope your opponent screws up and allows the board to repeat itself 3 times or to pin you into a stalemate. You can resign and spend more time on improving to come back and challenge the person you just lost to. Resignation, when warranted, is perfectly honorable. It doesn't show a lack of stamina or mental weakness. It might in boxing, hockey, or horse racing, but not in chess.
You have clearly never seen chess boxing ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kK5TQSKmS3o
Enjoy!!!
I loved it! I usally stop after two Queens figuring that was enough. I now have a newgoal of 5 Queens if someone refuses to resign. Most fun game I have seen posted in quite some time.
If you don't resign you can't complain how your opponent plays on.
Nooooooooo, I would have gotten 6 Queens! 
lol
It's not unsportsmanlike btw.
I think that GM Hikaru Nakamura once played against a chess engine and ended up with about 8 knights, which he used to gain checkmate. I'll have a sniff around in my memory and see if I can remember where I saw that. You might as well play some chess whilst your waiting - this could take a lot of sniffing and time.
Holy... The Onion? Monty Python? Do I believe Wikipedia that it's for real???
I think that GM Hikaru Nakamura once played against a chess engine and ended up with about 8 knights, which he used to gain checkmate. I'll have a sniff around in my memory and see if I can remember where I saw that. You might as well play some chess whilst your waiting - this could take a lot of sniffing and time.
I believe you're thinking about the game entitled "Horsing Around" on chessgames.com, where Nakamura checkmates Crafty with 6 Knights.
LOL getting several queens behind and then saying your opponent is doing something wrong! 
whats the point of chess if you resign? (in my opinion it is giving up!) I am proud of the fact that I have never resigned a rated game on chess.com throughout the time I have been on this site.I believe where there's a game there's a draw!