Lack of Respect?
Sort:
amac7079
Jul 15, 2008
0
#61
If it is of interest to anyone on either side of this discussion, there are plenty of problems in Tactics Trainer that materielly favor one side and yet the solution, as often as not, is favorable to the side with less material. It does take creativity and logic to create advantage when you are materielly disadvantaged and, if you have neither whether by choice or by force, it is more prudent to resign. Otherwise, play on.
gonnosuke... that is right... it has happened to me aswell... i couldnt see what they were tryin 2 achieve but when they told me... they gave me a perfect answer
Losing (badly) players who try to drag out the game are probably hoping you'll disconnect for a cheap win. Losing players who play fast to lower their average time per move are the smart(er) ones. Anyway, you'll also get the satisfaction of beating your opponent instead of him/her resigning. One more thing, if some players resign rather prematurely (their losing, let's say 7-12 points), don't think badly of them. They might have had a bad day, and can't handle chess as well (in which case, they shouldn't be playing the game, as the gloom carries over to how you play).
yeah... anything can happen in a game of chess.
u may think u have the game in ur hands but u can slip up anytime e.g lose of concentration and then ur game has gone.
I'm new at playing chess so regularly, and I thought it would be considered rude to resign from a game. Even when all was lost, I thought that denying my opponents the satisfaction of checkmating me would be considered very rude. Now I know it isn't.
Being affirmatively rude by actually requesting that your opponent resign is far worse that not resigning when your opponent thinks you should. If you're winning past the point when you would resign were you your opponent, I think it's best to just assume some benign reason for your opponent's failure to resign--like perhaps your opponent is more optimistic than you are, or maybe just less experienced than you are. And I've seen very good players simply miss a forced mate against them. If it turns out that your opponent is really just hoping you disconnect or get bored and leave, well, that reflects on your opponent, not you. Just don't play that person again.
Almost as bad as requesting that your opponent resign is offering a draw a second time (after your opponent has declined your first draw offer) before your opponent has offered a draw back to you. It would be nice if there were an actual rule against that so that websites could prevent that from happening by simple programming. In a live game on another website, I once had an opponent (who was way down in material and position) offer me a draw something like a dozen times in the space of a couple of minutes.
Here's the key: Those who assume that an opponent who is clearly beaten should resign at that point are assuming that the world owes them respect, or anything. The world doesn't owe you or me a thing, that's just a life lesson. You have to earn what you get, and sometimes you must continue to earn your daily bread. Respect isn't an exception to this rule.
In chess, nobody owes anyone a resignation. Resigning is a gesture coming from the losing player's mindset. It comes not when the winning player is supremely confident of victory, but when the losing player is supremely convinced of defeat. It has Nothing to do with what the winning player feels.
Lastly, as others have suggested, if you are upset about how long an opponent continues the game after he "should" have resigned, you need more practice on finishing games.
andelser wrote:
When facing children or very low rated players, I simply go on playing. If not, I promote all my pawns to knights and use them to checkmate the king.
That is a lot of free time.
