Etiquette: winning on time
It is a personal decision but if i can have a win on time i am happy to take it.
Only bitch-ass niggers win on time.
If ever there were a post to prove that time is a factor to be reckoned with, yours is it. Your time expired long ago.
Afterwards I felt uncertain about whether I should have resigned at the point where I was behind on material and time or whether it was perfectly acceptable to play for a win on time in that scenario in Blitz.
What are your views?
For me it depends on the time and material left on the board; it is subjective. In your case it's perfectly ok, a rook and pawns still stand a tiny chance of winning against a queen and pawns if a winning blow is readily available or the opponent is too complacent. On the other hand, if for example Black has only a h5 pawn stopped by White's h4 pawn (White also has a queen) when White's time is more than 1 min and Black tries to play on time, it would not be very ethical for Black to do so since Black does not have any reasonable chance of winning at all.
Having said that, time allocated is part of chess play, so we cannot fault players who attempt to win on time since this is not forbidden under the rules of chess, although these actions will reflect poorly on their sportsmanship.
Fuck those niggers.
There is no such thing as a "dishonorable win." The goal of Chess is to do the best you can within the rule set of the game, time is just as much a reasonable way to win as position.
Blitz chess is real chess, but with different playing conditions that make it of less value.