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.
as usual i agree with the grobe completely.
By the way, the amount of sympathy each side gets also depends on who posts the question on the forums. I searched, and huzzah, somebody has posted a thread on the opinion from the other side of the board.
http://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/is-this-rude2
Still a lot of disrepect for your side of the board, but lots of disrespect for your opponent as well.
thanks for the link, got to see the other site of the story
damn tho.. chess must be one of the only sports in the world where giving up is a sign of good sportsmanship.. i mean, u'll never see a professional NFL side or tennis player give up no matter what the clock or the scoreboard says.
By the way, the amount of sympathy each side gets also depends on who posts the question on the forums. I searched, and huzzah, somebody has posted a thread on the opinion from the other side of the board.
http://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/is-this-rude2
Still a lot of disrepect for your side of the board, but lots of disrespect for your opponent as well.
thanks for the link, got to see the other site of the story
damn tho.. chess must be one of the only sports in the world where giving up is a sign of good sportsmanship.. i mean, u'll never see a professional NFL side or tennis player give up no matter what the clock or the scoreboard says.
The difference between chess and other sports is however that each move could have virtually irreversible repercussions. Snooker (possibly boxing aswell) would be the only one I'd say that is similar in this regard, in that it's pointless playing on if several "snookers" are required. In a sport like tennis the only thing that changes after every point is the score..
i dont play much snooker, but as an amatuer boxer, i can personally say that i would never just 'resign', even if he was much stronger/had weakened me.
I must be misinformed regarding the origin of the saying "throw in the towel"
And cricket is the only sport where there's officially a stop for tea in the middle of the game. It doesn't mean that it's not an integral part of cricket.
Comparing to other games or sports doesn't really add anything to the dicussion. Resignation is an integral part of chess and that's all that matters.
And cricket is the only sport where there's officially a stop for tea in the middle of the game. It doesn't mean that it's not an integral part of cricket.
Comparing to other games or sports doesn't really add anything to the dicussion. Resignation is an integral part of chess and that's all that matters.
+1.
im not here on chess.com to offend anyone, and if all ya'll truly find the player that doesnt resign, rather than the player who would promote all pawns to queens before he/she would checkmate given the opportunity, to be the real culprit, as revealed by the link MichaelAtRichmond provided, then i guess all i can do is conform to this unique characteristic which seperates chess from all other types of sports.
or just don't resign. it's your call. but i mostly choose to resign in a situation like you're in. you certainly have the choice though.
@OP -
That's what she said...?
im not here on chess.com to offend anyone, and if all ya'll truly find the player that doesnt resign, rather than the player who would promote all pawns to queens before he/she would checkmate given the opportunity, to be the real culprit, as revealed by the link MichaelAtRichmond provided, then i guess all i can do is conform to this unique characteristic which seperates chess from all other types of sports.
I think the other sports you refer to dont have the option of "resigning" that chess does. Tennis players play until one player wins the match, which is usually best of 3 or 5 sets. Others , like soccer, football (USA) and basketball play a certain amount of time, like one hour, usually divided into 4 equal "periods". Basball is played for 9 innings and if the games is tied after 9 it goes into extra innings. However, snooker players can "resign" and often do when they are so far behind in a game/frame that its "hopeless" , same as chess. I have seen some of these sports where one side was so far behind with just a few minutes remaining that the argument could be made that perhaps it would be better if they did have the option of conceding defeat / resigning ?
it's strange that people feel like their honor or manliness is in question if they resign a completely lost chess game.
Maybe the no resign brigade should learn Backgammon. (either playing for points in a tourney, or money) Your opponent can challenge you to resign, or play on for double the stake. Only an idiot or a beginner would play on in a lost position, because you stand to lose more. I's called cutting your losses.
But does that apply in chess? I think it does. Fighting for lost causes use up resources, time, effort, which could be better employed in games that you have a realistic chance of winning or drawing.
Maybe the no resign brigade should learn Backgammon. (either playing for points in a tourney, or money) Your opponent can challenge you to resign, or play on for double the stake. Only an idiot or a beginner would play on in a lost position, because you stand to lose more. I's called cutting your losses.
great point.
The power of stalemate is a very common incident and I think, that it doesn't take that long for them to take your pieces so just let them do it. The game isn't worth getting mad over or resigning because if you resign you probably just missed out on a chance to laugh in there face because they stalemated.
Now on the other hand if he/she decides to just plainly march each and every pawn to the other side of the board then I think they are bored or have completely no Idea that they are wasting both of you guys time, meaning if you're a careless person, you would sit back and relax while doing other things with no anger, or you could resign because you feel he's rude and wants to make you resign.
Correct me if I'm wrong, if you resign, do you receive a high deduction from your rating, giving you one reason not to resign.
Correct me if I'm wrong, if you resign, do you receive a high deduction from your rating, giving you one reason not to resign.
Here is me correcting you.
Thank you!!! one person who sees what im talking about...
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.
I once knew someone who took his child to the doctor and didn't like the diagnosis. He proceeded to take his child to a number of other doctors who gave the same diagnosis. Finally he found one that gave him one that he preferred and that's what he treated his child for.
Thankfully, this does not have such potentially disastrous consequences.