Nobody resigns

All i hear is someone complaining about people not resigning because he has stalemated in a completely won position before. Never give up.

Percentages are a poor way to represent one's assessment of a chess position, especially for people rated <2000.  Exactly what would constitute the difference between a 75% chance to win and an 85% chance to win?

The question is qualitative.  Do you have legitimate counterplay?  Fine, play on.  Is your position completely out of gas?  Are you going to have to rely on a serious blunder from an opponent that is unlikely to make one at their demonstrated skill level?  Then resign, and play another game.  If you have a possible swindle in the form of sacrifice for a perpetual check or the like, by all means go for it.  If your idea of a "swindle" is to keep moving your lone king around and hope your opponents stalemate you with their Q+R, then you're just being an annoying dweeb...at *least* as annoying as the players that will promote 3-4 queens and try to embarrass you for not conceding a lost game.

Maybe "won the debate" isn't the right term to use. It depends on what the debate is. If someone wants to win, then yes, CalculatorKid obviously won because playing on is the only way to win, or at least draw. Quitting guarantees a loss. 

But if the debate is best use of your time, then it's probably a draw. Nobody wins the debate. Chess itself is probably not the best use of your time. So quitting and playing another game is not really a win because you STILL are not using your time wisely. So it depends on what you want to spend your time on. 

I'm sure there are some people who feel the best use of their time is to play chess until someone wins by checkmate or timeout. And I'm sure there are others who feel the best use of their time is to play chess, resign a bad position, and play another game of chess where they might have better odds. I really cant see how either one is "right" or "wrong". 

@snudoo my problem isn't with players like you. It's with those who think players SHOULD resign and even worse those who complain when they don't because they feel disrespected.

For some people. For others, it's the best use of their time. All people dont think the same way. 

@monsterchip it's not a waste of time because I enjoy the game.

@snudoo that daily game you posted, I would still play on there. I'd want to see if I can create anything with those pawns, plus if you are winning, you've earnt the checkmate. Enjoy it.

Didn't change anything.

Absolutely true. These are the people I want to be debated.

that's called counterplay. But what if you don't have any?

If you don't see any, then you are waiting for your opponent to blunder. Lost positions won't teach you anything.

You can play for the point, but you don't want to rely on the opponent for every match you play after going in a heavy disadvantaged losing position.

You enjoy getting your arse whooped? I doubt that.

RESIGNATION.IS FOR WIMPS - Period.As in warfare fight the enemy to the bitter end. No mercy.

I've never thought of it that way. In reality, resignation is for losers. Because resignation guarantees, without any question, a loss. The absolute, one hundred percent way to ensure that you lose, is to resign. So literally, and by literally I mean literally, only losers resign. 

Go get  a life.You.bore me 👎

Are you.out for a duck.mate?🦆😁

привет

привет