Downside of resigning after blundering a Queen
Sort:
I don’t think so because it’s hard to track their Elo after a year and I think no one think of this before
I accept that it's not a simple matter of just reviewing a bunch of games. But the data is there in chess.com, it just needs someone to extract it
Or, chess.com might see this and be able to extract the data themselves - then write an article in their blog 
As we go from 500 to 2500, we can expect queen-sized blunders to drop to 0
Yes, that's how I know I'm not 2500 yet
But I play so many people who, after blundering their queen, they resign. I figure this attitude will limit them - both in terms of not always being dependent on the queen, but also in terms of likelihood that they have a poor attitude and might end up quitting chess.
I was curious what the numbers said ...
yes. persevering even with a weak position shows (and grows) tenacity plus there is always a chance - if the opponent is also low rank - of a compensating blunder by the other side
Aug 3, 2024
0
#8
Regularly resigning after significant blunders might instill a habit of giving up too soon, which can negatively impact a player's mental toughness and ability to handle adversity. Developing a mindset of perseverance can be crucial for growth in chess and other areas.
Aug 3, 2024
0
#9
I just played a game where I blundered a queen (because the piece went where I did not intend it to go), but a few moves later my opponent blundered their queen. I still managed to lose somehow. But the moral of the story is hang in there. A game can always turn on a dime.
At lower levels in chess, say, under 1200, it might be worth hanging in there, because it is possible the opponent may go on to blunder his Queen.
Not a Queen blunder but I had a recent game where I was down on material and the opponent was all over me and I was barely fending him/her off. Then the opponent blundered a Knight, probably tempted by a potential Knight fork of King, Rook and Queen ruined by the fact that the opponent's Knight was hanging. Shortly after the opponent resigned though I would not say the position was hopeless. On the whole, I think tenacity pays in chess.
Has anyone ever done the following:
- analysed the games of people at different levels (500,1000,1500,2000,2500)
- noted (a) how often they resign when they blunder their Queen, and (b) what is their rating a year later
- shown evidence that resigning when you blunder a Queen is bad for your growth (or maybe the conclusion is different)
My understanding is it's possible to do this with existing chess.com games, but I have no idea how. Has this been done before?