Can we get an option to play No Resign Games?

Thinking about this, the original poster really does have a point. 

Below a certain level of skill, people often resign at the wrong time. It would actually help most players rated below ~1400 in live chess here not to resign their games but play them out to mate.

If a player knows he is lost, knows without a doubt the clearest way for his opponent to win, believes that his opponent can find that win without any difficulty, and sees absolutely no chances for a swindle, then it is time to resign. Just don't resign one move before mate. If you waited that long, play out the last move. Besides, many stalemates occur when mate in 1 is also on the board. 

To get all that right requires a level of skill few below ~1400 here can demonstrate on a regular basis. 

Whether there should be a variant here which forces players not to resign is another matter. 

Kayknight, as you noticed I used a "~" sign, to show "about". From my experience as a chess coach, players below 1500 USCF (and even above that in many cases) do not possess the skill required to know when to resign. I gave 1400 as a conservative number.

"Feck"?? Is that the "feck" in "feckless"? Seriously, don't you think you're being a bit of a prick telling someone to eff off just for making a suggestion, even if it is stupid? He just doesn't know what he's talking about for Christ's sake! Lighten up man, and get some "fecking" manners!

Kaynight, the following game was played between two grandmasters. 

You tell me on what move Black should have resigned. (No fair looking up the game.) 

This experiment can be performed on almost every decisive game between grandmasters. 

But beginner games have much bigger material deficits. You don't have to be strong to know when it's hopeless.

That's an easy resign after move 71...

Scott, take a look at the game I provided. When should a beginner have resigned in a game against another beginner?

71? Not that it matters exactly when.

Scott, congratulations on being able to look up the game. 

I didn't look up anything.

It's pretty obvious given a knight fork the next move, 2 pieces up and 2 passed pawns.

Clearly your experiment failed then. It doesn't take much to know exactly when to resign.

I'll come back later with a game from two GMs that isn't in your database and see how well you do.

If you need a database to see that position is resignable be it says more about your level of chess than any beginner. I don't have any means to search an online database and dont have one on my pc anymore.

Let's see how well you do with this one. It's not in your database:

I don't feel the need to play games with someone calling me a liar.

If you can't see that it's obvious to resign after move 71 you're obviously cheating to get your rating.

Infact, I'll play. Easy resign after 39, despite you adding obvious blunders afterwards again. Even a couple of moves earlier. In 37 it's over.

The fact is, a beginner wont be reigning as early as possibly. They resign when it's obvious.

Scott, actually the game was played between two GMs at 1 minute time control. The "obvious blunders" were actually played. 

If you don't consider the time control when considering when to resign, you're missing part of the puzzle.

Oops, slight edit.

It was completely hopeless at move 51. Just a matter of technique. Supposing these really were GM's.

At beginner level i suppose 71 is the correct answer.

Black actually resigned on move 43.

The answer to when Black actually resigned is given above.

Great trick. You're really still not making any points though.

It doesn't take a strong player to know when a game is hopeless.

Predicting when a GM might resign is a much more delicate balance.

Resigning a game too late isn't a problem though.

@ Scottrf. I edited my post before. Misread something. Your answer was right in fact.

Yes, not being able to resign sounds like a good idea, because i love it when people just close their browser rather than resigning leaving me waiting...