3I0
NEVER RESIGN !!
Sort:
Jan 5, 2018
0
#2
Never resigning assumes you care more about winning than having a quality game. To each their own
Jan 9, 2018
0
#3
SillyChessMoves a écrit :
Never resigning assumes you care more about winning than having a quality game. To each their own
How? It's a battle game, with war metaphor. If you want to win you have to do it literally...
Why even start if you don't care about winning?
I have even seen people resigning when they are down of a pawn...
Theoretically, if 2 players play perfectly, it will always be a draw. Which means that the winner is the one making the less mistakes. Resigning when you did one is assuming that the other will for sure not do any from this point. If you assume that why even start the game, because you are sure to lose and at best you'll get a draw!
Also for learning purposes, how to improve if you never see how it all goes down.
And for quality game, a beautiful checkmate (given or received) is what makes a quality game for me! ...not giving up at the first difficulty. It also bring more challenge to come back 
depends entirely on the position. Losing a pawn carelessly in the opening can be recovered from. Losing a pawn in the late middle to endgame can destroy a position. Generally, if I go down more than 2 pawns without a positional compensation, I'll resign.
SillyChessMoves. A game of chess was actually meant to be completed.
By resigning the game, the game will never be fully complete. And who knows? The losing player might find a way to draw/win the game if they persevere.
So if you ask me, I'd say that if the losing player sees chances, then he should be able to continue the game WITHOUT being scorned.
By resigning the game, the game will never be fully complete. And who knows? The losing player might find a way to draw/win the game if they persevere.
So if you ask me, I'd say that if the losing player sees chances, then he should be able to continue the game WITHOUT being scorned.
I'm playing someone who was banging out 5 or 6 moves a day until he lost his last pawn. I'm up 3 passed pawns to zilch now and for some odd reason he's taking his time. If he doesn't resign I'm going on vacation one move from mate. I can be childish too....
see this is another advantage of playing bullet, if they want to hate wait you they can only do it for 20 seconds or whatever.
Jan 9, 2018
0
#8
aaronprince a écrit :
depends entirely on the position. Losing a pawn carelessly in the opening can be recovered from. Losing a pawn in the late middle to endgame can destroy a position. Generally, if I go down more than 2 pawns without a positional compensation, I'll resign.
I would say, if you want to resign do it. I’m just a bit annoyed by this theory that you have to resign if you are losing...
many people were complaining because I wasn’t resigning in a losing position, for me you want to win you have to checkmate me 
@checkinthress - So are you really going to tell me that no GM has blown a game from a won position ever?
Jan 9, 2018
0
#10
la_pieuvre wrote:
Well seeing chess as a far and something only worth winning fits you in the categorization I was talking about. Also note I didn't say anyone is immorality for valuing winning over everything but to me if I think the game is lost of the advantage is obvious and I don't see anyway of winning than I will resign. Now if it's just unlikely that I'll win but there are enough pieces that it could get messy and confusing enough to create and advantage than yes play on. If you don't make your opponent beat you than they didn't learn anything.
But to me chess is about having fun and not about winning. I don't care if I have a half hour extra on the clock I'll resign if it's clear my opponent outplayed me and with more time they would win. I do it out of respect and for the fact that I don't care what my rating is. It means nothing to me.
Just another way to look at the game.
SillyChessMoves a écrit :
Never resigning assumes you care more about winning than having a quality game. To each their own
How? It's a battle game, with war metaphor. If you want to win you have to do it literally...
Why even start if you don't care about winning?
I have even seen people resigning when they are down of a pawn...
Theoretically, if 2 players play perfectly, it will always be a draw. Which means that the winner is the one making the less mistakes. Resigning when you did one is assuming that the other will for sure not do any from this point. If you assume that why even start the game, because you are sure to lose and at best you'll get a draw!
Also for learning purposes, how to improve if you never see how it all goes down.
And for quality game, a beautiful checkmate (given or received) is what makes a quality game for me! ...not giving up at the first difficulty. It also bring more challenge to come back
Jan 9, 2018
0
#11
SillyChessMoves a écrit :
Well seeing chess as a far and something only worth winning fits you in the categorization I was talking about. Also note I didn't say anyone is immorality for valuing winning over everything but to me if I think the game is lost of the advantage is obvious and I don't see anyway of winning than I will resign. Now if it's just unlikely that I'll win but there are enough pieces that it could get messy and confusing enough to create and advantage than yes play on. If you don't make your opponent beat you than they didn't learn anything. But to me chess is about having fun and not about winning. I don't care if I have a half hour extra on the clock I'll resign if it's clear my opponent outplayed me and with more time they would win. I do it out of respect and for the fact that I don't care what my rating is. It means nothing to me. Just another way to look at the game.
Like I said before it's not necessarily about winning, it's about completing the game. And once again my stance is not saying "you should not resign" my stance is do what you want but don't force other to do the same. not resigning is not disrespectful. neither resigning though
la_pieuvre wrote:
SillyChessMoves a écrit :
Never resigning assumes you care more about winning than having a quality game. To each their own
How? It's a battle game, with war metaphor. If you want to win you have to do it literally...
Why even start if you don't care about winning?
I have even seen people resigning when they are down of a pawn...
Theoretically, if 2 players play perfectly, it will always be a draw. Which means that the winner is the one making the less mistakes. Resigning when you did one is assuming that the other will for sure not do any from this point. If you assume that why even start the game, because you are sure to lose and at best you'll get a draw!
Also for learning purposes, how to improve if you never see how it all goes down.
And for quality game, a beautiful checkmate (given or received) is what makes a quality game for me! ...not giving up at the first difficulty. It also bring more challenge to come back
well in war if you lose you run away so it basically like resigning
Jan 9, 2018
0
#13
samwri a écrit :
well in war if you lose you run away so it basically like resigning
Some might say it's for coward
