"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?
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.
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.
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.
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...
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.
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.
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.
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...
Wrong, you missed it by 20 moves. It was completely hopeless at move 51. Just a matter of technique. Supposing these really were GM's.
Resigning a game too late isn't a problem though.
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...
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.
@ 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...
Just to be clear about my position, ceritus peribus, if I feel there is a decent chance at counterplay, I will play on for as long as I feel the ability to construct some sort of fighting plan.
I once won an OTB game against a very strong opponent, after having my position collapse after a hard-fought, very long game (the last game to finish in the round). Time pressure was a factor, the opponent was very low on time and there were several moves to go until time control. But the biggest factor was this: I had a rook on an open file and he had the typical back rank mate vulnerability. All I had to do was clear that file of pieces and I have an instant win. I threw away piece after piece tempting his pieces off the file and sure enough, he blundered BxN and it was over.
Had I not had reasonable counterplay, I would have resigned once it became clear that my position was hopeless. But given the checkmate possibility, the position was not completely hopeless. I had a realistic chance to save the game.
That sounds like a magnificent multi-sacrifice combination. I'd be interested in seeing that game if you have it.
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.