quitting after losing queen

I’m barely a 1000 rated player and I understand most people at my level are just trying to get better. However, it drives me nuts that once my opponent blunders their queen they automatically resign. There’s still plenty of chess left to play. I never resign after losing my queen. I see it as a challenge to best my opponent without it. We could all use the practice. Does this bother anyone else as much as it does me? Is there an unwritten rule with this? Can we spread the word to stop doing this? Ok, rant over.

Two other threads...

Because weak minded people think that the fun is now over. They feel defeated already & would rather be off to have a little cry. They will learn to eat more carrots one day.

Several things have already been mentioned in the other similar threads. I'd like to add the following:

According to my experience it depends on the time-format, the rating of the player and certainly the postion reached in the game if your opponent mostly resigns after losing a queen or in general a particular size of material.

I play mostly 5 min Blitz games with 5 sec increment (5|5) and have a rating of 1400 (in Blitz). At this level and with this time-format(!) in most cases a player will be winning if his opponent loses a light piece without having any positional advantage or material compensation. So it's not unusual that someone resingns at this point. The last game I remember, if that happens to me, I was able to trade of the heavy pieces in the next 20 moves and had additionally a passpawn - so my opponent resigned - I myself handle it similar to this example. Yes, once I had a game where I was unable to trade of the pieces (after winning a bishop), the position was kind of complicated and my opponent was able to create some threads and finnaly I losed this game... that happens too. But going ahead after blundering a queen for nothing (or nearly nothing) is quite out of the question.

In general I like to play with increment. You have a better chance to convert a clear advantage into a win and the risk that you lose such a game at the end because of timetrouble is very much lower.

Conclusion: @sirgreasypanda to my mind you should look at the positive aspekt of this issue. With your rating of barely 1000 in rapid you have reached a level, where most of the players see just a minimal chance for a comeback in a rapid-game after a queen blunder. So it saves time for you and your opponent.

smooth win (timeformat 5|5) after opponent blunders a knight (sometimes it's nontheless hard work to force the win or it happens that I lose on time despite increment)
---------------
oh no, my queen! – time to resign! ....see next post...

oh no, my queen! – time to resign!

 

Hot topic this is.

 

 

I try to play it to the end. Last night I lost a knight without compensation. 

 

 

 

I did a few mistakes after that to but my plan was to attack, attack and attack! Just make the game complicated so that my opponent burn time. And he did! 

Good fight, respectable attack and congrats to the deserved win!
With the weak dark squares even more challenging for black to defend.

I've seen that the time-format from your game was 3|2 – compared to 5|5 almost half of the time, makes it even harder to convert such a material advantage in a win. And things are going often crasy in the end because of timetrouble. (Understandable that your opponent didn't see the possibility to win your queen – having only a few seconds on the clock and a king and a rook in danger). To handle this is certainly part of the challenge, when playing 3|2.

Currently I guess this timeformat as a standard is to tough for me to be honest or in other words I feel clearly more comfortable with 5|5.

 

It's interesting because I'm a rapid player guy from the beginning, 1800 in Rapid. But I felt it was to slow on the computer and I wanted something more fun, so I went to 5|5 and then to 3|2 after some time (dropped over 100 point in that switch in the beginning). I think 3|2 have helped me improve quicker then 5|5 and instead I play 10 or 15 min games regularly to help with calculation training.

 

But yeah in under 5 min, never resign until it's just stupid to play on. Just set up trap and play some hope chess at least. If you can blunder so can your opponent. I have had games where I blunder my queen and 10 moves later my opponent blunders his!

It might partly because Mr. Shaibel in The Queen's Gambit tells Beth Harmon that she must resign after blundering away a queen. I don't know from where Mr. Shaibel produced this rule, but this story was many of the newest players' introduction to chess.

I remember there being been plenty of lower rated games in which I have lost a queen only to catch the opponents' queen in a discovered skewer or a fork a few moves later. The funniest was when an opponent who expected my resignation after capturing my queen said "good game" long before the end of a game they ended up losing.

If I blunder my queen I would rather spend my time on a new, closer game that will sharpen my skills more than uselessly defending a position a queen down. Time is limited.

One thing os resigning but many let the time run out and abondone the game - why? I almost never resign - learning a lot from losing positions.

I used to do that then practised utilizing other pieces such as my rooks. I managed to come back from queen blunders and even win after that.

Yes very annoying

Annoying, disrespectful, and weak behavior. I think it should be ostracized and punishable.

It mostly depends on the person if you ask me. At times they think they made a very good move with their queen not noticing that their queen was in danger with that move, then they just rage and resign. Or they just don’t get in the mood to play Chess anymore since they lost their 2nd most powerful peice (the king the 1st most powerful peice obviously). I used to sometimes do that because of that reason, but not anymore really. Although I do get mad at myself for losing the queen, but anyways I don’t think there’s really a lot of guessing to this since it mainly depends on the person of the reason why, but I think it’s mainly because at the start of the game right when you lose your queen, you can’t really deny that you would be mad at yourself, since the queen is a very powerful peice, which would make sense on why you don’t wanna play anymore.
But it doesn’t really mean when you lose your queen it’s just: ‘NOOOO I LOST MY QUEEN HOW DARE I I LOST THE GAME NOOO AAGHAGHAGGHHG’
Peaple mainly just get a bit frustrated at themself, and when they realize that they could’ve made a checkmate they already resigned for it to be too late to make that checkmate and stuff. This is too long I’m probably gonna stop. I’m also pretty sure this goes with everyone on every level. Even the person that taught me chess is on a very high level, and even had this happen to himself. He lost his queen so he resigned, but later when he went back to see the game, he realized he could’ve made a checkmate.