Is It Unsportsmanlike to Delay Checkmate?

Sort:
TheChainedKingOfOblivion

Hey everyone,

I wanted to start a discussion about chess etiquette and sportsmanship. I’ve noticed that some players—when they clearly have a forced checkmate available—choose to keep making extra moves instead of finishing the game. Sometimes this leads the opponent to resign out of frustration rather than letting the checkmate happen naturally.

Do you think this is unsportsmanlike behavior? Or is it simply a part of the psychological battle of chess?

Would love to hear your thoughts—do you finish a won game as soon as possible, or do you think there's an advantage in making extra moves before delivering checkmate?

Brisingaro

yk or they missed the forced checkmate because they are bad, or its not a forced checkmate and you think it is.

Cassian_Cashout

Of course not i always like finding checkmate in 10 and not just playing mate in 1

ilo

the losing side shouldn't have to resign, nor should the winning side be forced to play as well as they can. they can promote 7 knights if they want.

typa-gurl

.

KingOfBrilliancy

dk

MeercatsForMayor

I consider it generally rude.

C00lkidd_Chess

I would let the opponent make his mistakes and if I can, make that into a winning opportunity

thebroski555

No bcs no one does it outside of oversights.

C00lkidd_Chess
KingOfBrilliancy wrote:

dk

Donkey Kong???

BobRossOfWar

In my experience your opponent will troll you by not finishing a game that is clearly won, because you didnt resign earlier. They think that youre wasting their time or somehow insulting them for playing on, implying you think they will throw the game away. So they waste more time, promote 4 Knights and try to annoy you til you resign. I dont agree with this midset but it does happen quite often at low levels. Although even a 3000 rated player made a video called the Mona Lisa checkmate showcasing this idea.

Leftehnuhnt-Lmao

omg my opponent won’t resign, i will get revenge by queening all my pawns.

sleepy-andrew

lol

MightyBorough

If theirs a checkmate and they just sit there and keep you waiting until the time goes down it is definitely unsportsmanlike, to not put you out of your misery and keep you waiting is low.

ilo
MightyBorough wrote:

If theirs a checkmate and they just sit there and keep you waiting until the time goes down it is definitely unsportsmanlike, to not put you out of your misery and keep you waiting is low.

thats stalling. hes talking about making unnecessary moves

olebon

You probably either overestimate your opponents or see something that's not really there. Usually I see the opposite, for some reason people mostly from Arabic countries just stop playing in case they see the game is lost. However, sometimes when the mate is imminent people delay the final move. In general, the higher level, the more polite players. In rapid below 1300 people often are very aggressive and trying to offend their opponent, but I've never seen such behavior above 1600.

ThinkSquareChessAcademies
ilo wrote:

the losing side shouldn't have to resign, nor should the winning side be forced to play as well as they can. they can promote 7 knights if they want.

Agreed. I teach my students the same.

MeercatsForMayor

I would argue it's rude to promote 7 knights. Just checkmate and move on. You shouldn't make someone sit around.

GraffitiPanda

I think it depends i would ask the other person "hey are you okay if I do a pawn check mate instead of mate in 2"

ilo
MeercatsForMayor wrote:

I would argue it's rude to promote 7 knights. Just checkmate and move on. You shouldn't make someone sit around.

it would be just as rude to not resign.