draw or resign

hello fellow chess players i am just curious as to at what point do you resign or request draw from a game depending on loosing or winning postition, what is cosidered noble, obviously you know when you have been beaten but you could milk it out for many moves i am just curious is there a general concensus on that?

thanks

that depends on the position, some games I resign down a pawn but in some games I feel like I still have a tactical shot down a rook.

you should never milk it out for many moves without any hope.

I would never ask for a draw in a lost or winning position. it would not be considered "noble" to ask for a draw in a losing position.

If person 'A' is clearly going to lose, yet their opponent 'B' can't beat the clock, what would you do in each persons shoes? Play it out, resign, or offer a draw?

i resign when i feel i could take my opponent's side and win the game without much difficulty. the criteria for that changes as i get better. i offer a draw if i feel i have no chance outside of a major blunder by my opponent and that likewise my opponent doesn't either. again, as i get better the criteria for that changes. before i'd fight on until king against king for example in a king and pawn against king endgame, but now if i can see i can't force the pawn to promote and my opponent shows he knows how to prevent the pawn from promoting i will just offer a draw and not go on until stalemate or i have to give my pawn up.

thanks for your opinions,i have found some other threads on it and will continue to read them,I feel that chess is a noble mans sport and only desire to do whats right and not waste someones time,i have played people in the past that milk it out so to speak and it is very frustrateing,but as you said a good player should be able to go ahead and win the game regardless,but 1 more question "is a "stalemate" an honerable end? I tend to feel that you know if you have been beaten,and should probably resign b4 stalemate

RFC69 wrote:

thanks for your opinions,i have found some other threads on it and will continue to read them,I feel that chess is a noble mans sport and only desire to do whats right and not waste someones time,i have played people in the past that milk it out so to speak and it is very frustrateing,but as you said a good player should be able to go ahead and win the game regardless,but 1 more question "is a "stalemate" an honerable end? I tend to feel that you know if you have been beaten,and should probably resign b4 stalemate

Stalemate is a cool tool at your disposal. I resign when I don't have a chance. If I have a chance to pull off a stalemate I just might go for it. Sometimes you have to make your opponent earn his or her win. Why roll over dead and hand him or her a full point (at my level anyway). This is also dependent on the strength of my opponent. If they are considerably stronger I probably won't waste my time or theirs. If they are closer to me, you might have to earn it, kind like making your opponent sink that put in match play in golf.

stalemate is also alright if the other person is low on time and doesn't know how to win, you can set a stalemate trap.

if the other person falls the stalemate trap it was the right decision.

That's a very sensible approach, and what I try to do too.

[edit] with some exceptions,  eg. I would not resign a K vs K+B+N ending, even against a strong player, because even though I know how to do it, I know even GM's have failed.

I also would not grant a draw in a R vs B ending, unless my opponent shows he knows the technique.

Something odd happened in your post kayknight. I read chess is not a sport instead of chess is a sport. Either way I am not sure why that was written but it's adding words into your post that changes the meaning completely.

Because chess is a sport. You can argue if it is or isn't an athletic sport, but it is a sport. But quibbling over his terminology with sport which has nothing to do with his content is a rather poor sport of you, kayknight.

If I am playing someone 600 points higher than me and drop a piece, I would resign. If I am playing someone 600 points lower than me, I could drop a queen and still play on.

So it depends. If you think that you still have a chance to win, play on. If not, resign.

As for the clock, it is part of the game. If I have a King and a pawn and 20 minutes on my clock, and my opponent has 4 queens but only 3 seconds left, I will win on time. There is nothing noble about doing anything else.

Since this thread is not about whether chess is a sport or not, I will not get involved with that (overdone) question.

its all up to you if you dont think you will win then resign 

Ok, thanks again everyone, I appreciate all the comments,seems there is no standard here, each circumstance and opinion seems right and yet differant...

Learn by doing

Aren't you curious to see your opponent's winning technique?  In the meantime if you really are in a losing position you are analyzing for perpetual check, stalemate, 3-move repetition.  And, if you are ahead in material you are analyzing for a way to return the material in order to equalize or regain the initiative. 

Not a sport? I do 200 push-ups every morning! 100 working left,100 right.

I do not see written word resign & draw in the gadget

draw