JUST MATE ME ALREADY!!

whats worse than stuffing up, say, by forgetting that bishops move diagonally, losing your queen, and subsequently leaving your king defenseless in a pawnless corner like the pathetic monarch it has been reduced to?

when your opponent refuses to give you a coup de grace and checkmate you when it is clearly in their power to do so, and instead proceeds to strip you off all your peices; peice by excruciating peice. its true, by not going for the mate, they risk the possibility of making a mistake, allowing you to turn the tables, but thats very unlikely when you're down a queen and losing a knight or bishop every second move.

to me, it just wastes every body's time, and the only outcome is a bloated ego on the other side of the board upon witnessing a board swept clean of their opponents peices.

One word.

Resign

Word. If a player wouldn't resign in such a position, probably he deserves the punishment.

im not the type of player that resigns as soon as they lose there queen. nor am i the type of player that denies another the opportunity to make a well-deserved mate mid game. but i do expect the other player to have the decency to extend that coupe de grace i was talking about and not drag it on.

if it makes you feel any better, yes, i did resign after i realized my opponent was going for the minor peices.

Etiquette dictates that you resign, and is also usually dicatates that he can't ask you to do so.  He's giving you a not-so-subtle reminder that in case you're being rude, it's time, and in case you're just naive, it's still time.

I'm just saying..

when your down a queen, and they can mate you but instead they take even more "free" pieces, your pretty much screwed.. save some time and resign!

But if you want to play on that is your choice.

so, when in a position where you could easily checkmate, you'd rather go for minor peices to indicate to your opponent 'its time to resign' than checkmate them?

This is a pretty ridiculous complaint -- if you feel your time is being wasted while your in a clearly lost it's completely within your power to put an end to it without compromising the outcome.

Your opponent, on the other hand, doesn't have that luxury and although dragging the game out is obviously a petty way to send the message, the validity of that message is intact.

     You think it's rude to delay giving checkmate? How about those who question your intelligence by not resigning, even though they are so very clearly lost? You may be thinking- "But dc, he could still stalemate me..." If you're down that much material, you should at least understand that your opponent is competent enough to win. There's a bit of "An eye for an eye" thing with online chess; If you don't resign, your opponent has every right to rub the win in your face.

The ball is always in your court when your position is lost.  He's teaching you.  You asked, we're answering.

iono, ya'll have a point, when it comes to a mate thats 10 steps away. but when its literally 2 steps away? a) move the knight in position b) move the queen to mate. i just think that in cases like the latter, a mate is the better ending.

yeah i think resigning is the thing to do bud. It's a sign of respect for your opponent's playing ability. It's well within his right to move as he sees fit. 

Sometimes (only in live chess) if im up king+queen+rook or any minor piece vs just his king ill throw my queen or any other piece away just to prove that i can mate just as easily with the rook and king. I dont think that's nearly as rude as not resigning in that position, judge me if you want.

Of course in CC when you have all the time in the world you mate as quickly and as fancily as you can, ironic really.

How long does it take to deliver a 2-move mate? Up to days in correspondance chess, and at least a few seconds in live chess.

How long does it take to resign? 1 second

If you want to save time, which would be the better way? I think it's obvious, isn't it?

Amen.  WuGambinoKillaBee, it's obvious you don't want to hear what we're telling you, but if you see mate in two and don't resign, it's you that are in the wrong and not your opponent.  Take our advice and learn this ettiquette or don't; it's up to you.  All we're saying is that if you don't learn this now, you're going to see more of it in the future until you do.

hmmm i personally if they showed no signs of checkmating and instead goes on a pathetic "im gonna take all your pieces off the board" kind of tactic i would have resigned but i also think that a player who could mate in 2 and chooses not to instead taking all the pieces off this board then i hold very little respect for such an opponent. 

To me playing chess is meant to be about pitting ones mind against another, not sitting there thinking "i can beat this guy in 2 moves but im gonna have a laugh and take all his pieces instead" thats just rude!!

ok... i resign

Thank you!!! one person who sees what im talking about... yeh, i did resign upon realizing they're going on a minor-peice hunt, but would have rather they mated me and gave the game a sense of closure.

i have been in that position myself so i completely empathise with ya. The player in question had taken off all my pieces and i was down to just pawns and although it wasnt quite mate in 2 he could have done something different than attempting to promote all his pieces to put me in checkmate.

I lost complete respect for the player and as soon as i saw what he was doing i resigned and blocked the said player. 

Not nice!!

Well, now you have a choice.  You can take this one person's opinion that coincides with yours, decide you're right, and go through this same thing every time it happens in the future, or you can examine the logic of the other eight people who tried to teach you by offering the logic the other way and then avoid this situation next time.  Totally up to you, but please don't bother to ask the question again next time; you'll already know the answer.