Nobody resigns

 

 

In so far as the goal is to win, I find that at least half of the games I play hinge on blunders, many of which turn a won game into a loss. Frequently I lose games due to poor play in the endgame. It's very important to play that out to understand.

I should add that there is a big difference between not resigning and just not moving after blundering. The latter is totally not ok.

But still, it's just better for the losing person to just resign and not waste time.

Hau! Kunzima lokhu

Mhlawumbe  xxxxx  udlala uShesi njengo fudu? Hlekani.nina nonke!😁😁😁😁😁😁

95% of the time I can identify a cheater in live games and make them pay by playing out and not get the rating points just with out any cost.If in positional play he is far superior to you - not worth to prolong the game with out resigning-As for titled players they play high rated players and know the future course of the game and can afford to resign.But have actually seen 2900 and 3000s drop their piece or hang their piece under time pressure in bullet games while watching , like ordinary low rated players  do in normal games.

To quote YOU " You want to get humiliated or what?

Long time no see

You are wrong, the everyone who thinks your opponent needs to resign when you got a great advantage. Hikaru Nakamura, the grandmaster, once said: “If you are losing, don’t resign, no matter what!” And I think he is totally right. First, say if you think your opponent just did a blunder, and you think you got a advantage, but what if your opponent plays a spectacular move, that caused you to resign? You can’t just force your opponent to resign! Second, remember, most of the chess players play chess to achieve one of his goal: To become a grandmaster. But to do that, you first need to raise your rating. To raise your rating, you need to win more games, which most people won’t resign, unless you are going to be mated within 1 to 4 moves. I like that somebody in this forum said: “To win in a ‘winning’ position is extremely hard” or something like that.

Your opponent had compensation #4 this is why he did not resign

And since you won who cares. For me, when am I annoyed when opponents don't resign, when I loose or miss the win. I dont have any problem to waste time, nobody is running after me. Take your time and win the game. If opp had compensation like in post 4 there is no reason to resign, most of the time I do resign, except if I have compensation, or counterplay

 Sometimes I resign if I,m a little down in material and it's a boring position. Sometimes I get a message after the game asking me why I resigned. On the other hand, sometimes if I'm behind and considering resigning, I say to myself, I think I'll just play 3 or 4 more moves, then things start to go my way.

To give proper dues, the quote "The hardest game to win is a won game" was attributed to former World Chess Champion Emanuel Lasker. He said it about 100 years ago but still just as true today.

I think, one should only resign when there is a forced mate or precursor to forced mate. For example, a pawn about to promote to a queen is a forced mate, and if your opponent shows proper technique in some tricky endgames (ie, queen vs rook, N+B mate, for beginners sole rook mate) Then it is polite to resign (Or offer a draw in R vs. B, R vs. R+N etc) because your opponent has shown on the board they know what to do

I find fault with people who don't resign only when they are clearly just stalling/burning time. Otherwise feel free to play on and I will be happy to test my finishing skills for the minute or so it takes

Here is a bullet game I just played. Always fight for stalemate!

What we are talking about does not apply to bullet. We are talking about long time controls

Bullet is a longo time control.

Nice smositional win!