Lack of respect
Sort:
That's certainly true. But you should accept that it is your opponents choice to not show any respect. This does nothing to you, all he is doing is showing that he is not as developed a person as you are. Don't concern yourself with such things.
It certainly does show a lack of respect, but the person you are playing is just showing how immature he is, and his own lack of manners. However, it is his decision, so do not worry about it. You should mate him fairly quickly, and then it is he who is immature, and you who have won.
Does it really happen so often as to bother you?
it hasn't happened to me thus far
Thanks for your input guys, don't get me wrong 'all i'm saying is i have been playing chess for about 40 years now and it just seems like there is no respect for your opponent anymore.
The good news is, the longest K+Q+Q vs K mate is four moves.
likesforests wrote: The good news is, the longest K+Q+Q vs K mate is four moves.
...which surely isn't long enough to get wound up by it.
I think there is a tendency on this site for people to think the worst about their opponents motives. For example, personally, I do not have enough chess experience yet to recognise the point at which a game has become lost, and therefore I might play some positions past the point at which more experienced players may resign, so that I can learn how these positions will go on to lose and thereby build up my knowledge and experience (see my most recent defeat, for example).
OK, so the example in this thread is an extreme one, but I have read this complaint over and over again. As has been said many times, quit moaning, give your opponent the benefit of the doubt, and finish the game.
Jan 29, 2008
0
#8
likesforests wrote: The good news is, the longest K+Q+Q vs K mate is four moves.
Unless the guy with the queens causes stalemate. Unless you have a darned good reason to risk it, one is probably the number of queens to use.
At my chess club, there is this one opponent who always plays on till checkmate. I thot that was the norm for rapid play.
So I've got no problems with that. But apparently, when I did the same to another player during a rapid game, he got furious and refused to shake my hand afterwards. Go figure that out. *shrug*
Myles wrote: likesforests wrote: The good news is, the longest K+Q+Q vs K mate is four moves.
...which surely isn't long enough to get wound up by it.
I think there is a tendency on this site for people to think the worst about their opponents motives. For example, personally, I do not have enough chess experience yet to recognise the point at which a game has become lost, and therefore I might play some positions past the point at which more experienced players may resign, so that I can learn how these positions will go on to lose and thereby build up my knowledge and experience (see my most recent defeat, for example).
OK, so the example in this thread is an extreme one, but I have read this complaint over and over again. As has been said many times, quit moaning, give your opponent the benefit of the doubt, and finish the game.
I completely disagree. Worst case scenario : the time control is a move every 14 days , only 4 moves to mate but the loser is waiting till that last hour of the 14 days to make his move, you do the math! Its OBVIOUS he isnt resigning simply because hes (or she) is a jerk and is doing this out of spite. This is extremely bad "sportsmanship" and I will be glad when there is a sportsmanship rating here so I can simply avoid such bozos in the first place. I had one who was in check, had one legal response and it was mate next move. They went on vacation and after making me wait several days when they did come back didnt move or resign but just let their time run out. Whats wrong with such people?
King_William wrote: Reb wrote: Myles wrote: likesforests wrote: The good news is, the longest K+Q+Q vs K mate is four moves.
...which surely isn't long enough to get wound up by it.
I think there is a tendency on this site for people to think the worst about their opponents motives. For example, personally, I do not have enough chess experience yet to recognise the point at which a game has become lost, and therefore I might play some positions past the point at which more experienced players may resign, so that I can learn how these positions will go on to lose and thereby build up my knowledge and experience (see my most recent defeat, for example).
OK, so the example in this thread is an extreme one, but I have read this complaint over and over again. As has been said many times, quit moaning, give your opponent the benefit of the doubt, and finish the game.
I completely disagree. Worst case scenario : the time control is a move every 14 days , only 4 moves to mate but the loser is waiting till that last hour of the 14 days to make his move, you do the math! Its OBVIOUS he isnt resigning simply because hes (or she) is a jerk and is doing this out of spite. This is extremely bad "sportsmanship" and I will be glad when there is a sportsmanship rating here so I can simply avoid such bozos in the first place. I had one who was in check, had one legal response and it was mate next move. They went on vacation and after making me wait several days when they did come back didnt move or resign but just let their time run out. Whats wrong with such people?
So in the end the win was awarded to you? What's the complaint?
The complaint is that this was a calculated insult to me and caused me to have to check this game every day when it could have been over (with some honor intact) had they simply resigned or moved and let me mate them. Something else, people who defend such behavior are no better , in my book, than those who behave this way. I now am much more picky about who I play , I no longer play people who have 5% time outs or more. I also check the losses of people I am considering playing and if I see they refuse to resign when clearly lost I simply dont play them.
likesforests wrote: The good news is, the longest K+Q+Q vs K mate is four moves.
I have been in the position of the lone king and mate that setup last ten moves, but I think it was because the person I was playing wasn't very sure how to mate sombody with those pieces. From what I have read though it does look like an insult to me
King_William wrote: Reb wrote:
The complaint is that this was a calculated insult to me and caused me to have to check this game every day when it could have been over (with some honor intact) had they simply resigned or moved and let me mate them. Something else, people who defend such behavior are no better , in my book, than those who behave this way. I now am much more picky about who I play , I no longer play people who have 5% time outs or more. I also check the losses of people I am considering playing and if I see they refuse to resign when clearly lost I simply dont play them.
And I'm really glad you start choosing opponents that suit your criteria, because this constant complaining is working on my nerves.
You complain about some calculated insult some player directed at you by his behavior, then Mr. Etiquette goes and call him a jerk? Way to go dude.
Btw, I resign when my position is lost, although here and there I might play a game a few moves more than what is necessary. I don't go on vacation, without actually going on vacation and letting the time run out is not my style either. So all in all I'm not defending what this player does. You calling me a jerk, does not really bother me. It only tells me something more about you.
LOL I wondered why you would defend such behavior willie until I just checked your most recent loss to kawazaki ! A game that you also should have resigned long before you did. 
Its not surprising to find one defending "their own". I am sure if I checked some more of your losses I would find more such games. Its only natural for one to defend their own eh?
Any player with any honor at all would have resigned when they dropped a piece to a higher rated player....DUH.
LOL I wondered why you would defend such behavior willie until I just checked your most recent loss to kawazaki ! A game that you also should have resigned long before you did. Its not surprising to find one defending "their own". I am sure if I checked some more of your losses I would find more such games. Its only natural for one to defend their own eh?
In this game with kawazaki on which move white should resign? If it's Rebs game then probably on move eight 8.d4... Bad day.. Piece down.. blunder.. and resign. But for a 1400 rated player the board is still full of chances.
Although many (if not all) tend to resign when they see no chances. It happens that some resign too late. Because what is a late resign for Fritz, Reb or for me.. might be early resign for King William.
You have to see my wife playing against a computer set to ELO 1000. She wins almost every game enen though from time to time she losses a piece or two ;)
Don't get me wrong (as you did with King William) I have no respect for people who resign late in correspondence chess. But this game is still playable at level of 1400.
I have come from behind in games where I only had a Q and a few pawns and the other guy had Q, N,R, and pawns, and I have lost games where I had the overwhelming majority, so until the King can't move out of check, its still anybody's game.
well i would like to say to Reb that thats not true. often pieces are sacrificed in games and they look like a loss and in the end it enifits the game. the idea behind resigning is that you accept defeat. if they dont accept defeat shove it down their throat. basically if you have a game with a time restrint of 14 days your asking for a long game from the beginning. i dont accept to a game unless the time restraint is 3 days. thats a good time for me and is usually pretty safe. also when you play a game through you often find that your situation is still quite playable after you thought you had no hope. play it til the end because if you dont you never know what would have happened, maybe you made a terrible blunder whats to say that your oponant wont either?
King_William wrote:
Reb, if you must take a stab at it? Do you think I respect you now more, or less after your earlier postings?
I think you have no respect for others period willie, but especially you disrespect the elderly. You called me "old man" and you have also used age to attack another member here. It seems to me you are an "ageist". I have seen that its common practice for you to attack anyone who disagrees with you and if they are beyond a certain age you use that as one angle of your attack. I have seen you say that as an employer you would fire an employee that you caught here while they are on the job and yet you seem to spend a lot of time here yourself when you are on the job. Ever hear of leading by example? I suppose not.
Respect is subjective. If I want to play a lopsided game out (win or lose), I usually ask my opponent first if they mind so they don't think I'm being "disrespectful".
On the other hand though I've played a few games where I should have resigned but hung in there and eventually won... and vice versa (had the game in hand, one thought-less move and eventually lost).
No matter how you feel about it, resigning is the OPTION of your opponent and they aren't required to play any way they don't feel like playing. If that bothers you that much just don't play them again.
It is one thing to play out a game when you are losing in order to learn something i got no problem with that, but to continue a game where you are down to a king vs. 2 queens for instance shows a clear lack of respect for your opponent. When you are down MASSIVE amounts of material and in a position where you have no chance at all just resign.