Resignation Etiquette

I agree with your last statement, and it coincides with what i have said. If you didn't get that I can't help you.

And let me make one thing clear: I don't like your 'oberlehrer' (=highschool teacher) attitude.

You continue to deform my statements . But I am tired to put things in order.

I never insulted anybody. (perhaps some childish sensible superpatriots, but that is their fault, not mine, I treat everybody on this planet the same way, I do not consider any nation or nationality worse or better than the other. )

I now leave the the field to the nitpickers who are afraid to make any statements.

mandelshtam wrote:

I agree with your last statement, and it coincides with what i have said. If you didn't get that I can't help you.

And let me make one thing clear: I don't like your 'oberlehrer' (=highschool teacher) attitude.

You continue to deform my statements . But I am tired to put things in order.

I never insulted anybody. (perhaps some childish sensible superpatriots, but that is their fault, not mine, I treat everybody on this planet the same way,

mandelshtam wrote:

I am a peaceful person, I have few conflicts.

 "How dare you to judge about my life."

"Topics were blocked because I wrote something against a player who insulted me When I told him/her my opinion in harsh words,""I saw that two of my topics have been blocked. BY WHOM ? FOR WHAT?"

"Topics were blocked because I wrote something against a player who insulted me during an ongoing game"

"I must say that if some person of the staff did this, I find this unacceptable."

"I don't care about you."

When I told him/her my opinion in harsh words, challenged her/him to a new game, he/she threw more dirt on me, calling me sick...

topic was blocked because political themes were discussed (I was not the only one who did that in that forum). I was informed about the blocking later ...

another superpatriot who attacks me for telling some little story about great 'America'.

"I saw that two of my topics have been blocked. BY WHOM ? FOR WHAT?

"Shall I give you a list of nations which has  more chess knowledge/culture per inhabitant ? Would you shut up then ?"

"Still you don't name the issue where I went wrong."

"I am a peaceful person, I have few conflicts. "

"i have made my point very clear here, everybody can read it."

Mandelshtam

""i have made my point very clear here, everybody can read it."

""How dare you to judge about my life."

""I am a peaceful person, I have few conflicts. "

I have now to ask the community of chesscom to defend me. There are some people to try continuously to discredit me as a person, my arguments. I doubt that they have any interest in a substancuial discussion.

Under these circumstances i have nothing to do here.

I wonder who will have the etiquette to resign from this odd argument.

Shall we call an all-stop to the hostilities? It stopped being benefitial a while back...

sure. since everything was said.

Cease fire guys. (PS: Nice one rael)

I think we should consider it a VICTORY for commonsense (if it ends real soon!)

On a marginally different point: does anyone else find that the direct use of chess.com handles in this way...

       rael mentioned resigning (again) and claypot talked about a draw (which is off-topic)

comes across as aggressive?

Sounds like I should feel guilty. I DON'T!

I need not to offer ceasefire, because I did not fight a battle, and since I said that there are no new arguments changed for quite some time.

I still had to answer many threads where my arguments were deformed, or my experiences accused as being lies.

I would be satisfied if some of the people who are in favor of 'never resign', or who believe that there does not exist any etiquette about  'timely resignation', will now begin to accept that a lot of players are out there who think differently about  this issue than they do.

And I thought you were one of the good guys in chess,you know,those who

make the chess, how Joker would do.

I hope that you know to give credit to the opponent in style,when you loosing?

There,s allways a rematch

and "I gonna give it to them"

I agree. One shall not beat the curd in the hope it might become cream.

mandelshtam wrote:

I agree. One shall not beat the curd in the hope it might become cream.

I would put it differently: don't recite sutras to a horse. It does neither you nor the the horse any good.

I actually cited it to all the people who don't contribute at all, or repeat arguments that have been spoken out long ago.

I suspect that virtually all of the people who wish to contribute to this particular discussion about resignation have already done so. Those who have chosen not to join the discussion, may well have discussed this issue on one or more of the previous occasions.

It might be informative to conduct a poll about attitudes towards resignation. Has the facility of user-created polls been introduced yet - or are all polls still created by Staff?

Is there any chance that the current group of discussion participants could agree the wording of such a poll? Here's an intial stab:

Under what circumstances would you consider resigning from a turn-based chess game:

• my opponent gains a significant lead
• my opponent gains an overwhelming lead
• I am fairly sure my position is hopeless
• I am 100% certain that I have lost
• never
• depends on factors other than material or positional advantage

halsamdu wrote:

dwaxe wrote:

Don't be stupid, you should resign if you are sure that if you were playing the opposite side, you could beat even a grandmaster.

True and right!

I was wrong about one thing. NOT everyone who wishes to contribute to this thread has done so.

I've never played a grandmaster so I can't be sure how easy or difficult they are to beat. I suspect there's some variation among them; they must have the occasional off-day.

That's why a survey or poll conducted through chess.com's survey mechanism should provide more robust and objective data about attitudes towards resignation.

Rude behaviour / a breach of etiquette?

Rude behaviour / a breach of etiquette?

again the same suspicion: I am not objective???? I swear, my report about opinion w.r.t. that issue is based on many hundresde of conversations I had with chess players of all levels.

And then this other sting: playing against me and resign, or playing against somebody else...

My name is mandelshtam, not mandeltsham.

mandelshtam wrote:

again the same suspicion: I am not objective???? I swear, my report about opinion w.r.t. that issue is based on many hundresde of conversations I had with chess players of all levels.

artfizz writes: I, for one, am not questioning your integrity. I have no difficulty believing that many chess players at your level think as you do, particularly in the environment in which you play them (i.e. OTB tournaments, chess clubs, ...)

mandelshtam continued: And then this other sting: playing against me and resign, or playing against somebody else...

artfizz rewrites: That was uncalled for on my part - I've amended it. For you, I suggest, there is only one (chess) universe, and the same 'table manners' apply throughout it. That is, there is no distinction between OTB tournaments, chess clubs and chess.com.

For me, there are two (or more) chess universes. At an OTB tournament,  semi-rigid codes of behaviour apply. Chess.com is a more informal environment and the same strict 'table manners' are not appropriate.

My name is mandelshtam, not mandeltsham.

sure politocs is a topic but come on its all over the tv I enjoy ches.com becuse im able to play people from all over the world and the differant ways each plays yes chess is very one on one I like the challenge of it and ever since Bobbi Fischer came along Ive been hooked its like an addiction really and yes I try to play more games than I can handle on here but oh well on resigning sure Ive wanted to but I use those times to better my defensive moves and yes even when down theres still a chance so anyway lighten up some well anyhow have agood one

mandelshtam wrote:

I swear, my report about opinion w.r.t. that issue is based on many hundresde of conversations I had with chess players of all levels.

This is what you said in your post 191: "The attitude to resign in a supposedly lost position in Europe is not restricted to masters or people with elo 2200. It is an attitude, it is common etiquette of the majority of ckubplayers, which involves people with rating from 1800 (DWZ or Elo) and above."

I doubted whether 1800 or 2200 made any difference when considering the attitude of lower ranked players versus higher ranked, since 1800 is hardly the rating of beginners or even mediocre players. (I believe Elo 1800 in the USCF is called "expert.") I don't think you responded to that.

When you now assert that your knowledge of the opinions of others is based on conversations with players "of all levels," are you still only referring to players above 1800? If so, I still don't see how that could describe players of all levels.

More germane to this discussion: Since you don't seem to disagree with me (and others) that the attitude toward resignation is different -- and should be different -- between higher rated players and lower rated players, or even between OTB games and turn-based games, what is it that you are arguing now? I'm not sure what point you are trying to make, since you seem to agree with the only point -- on this topic -- that I thought was in dispute.

Mandelshtam said:

"You grimreaper just don't like that facts, and therefore just claim the facts are not true."

Please clarify typographical error for "that facts" and explain either where I claimed facts are not true or "that fact" (a specific fact) was not true.  All I said was that usually someone who constantly has to prove...

And after that I cease fire.