STOP RESIGNING

Sort:
Avatar of doodoochessplayer
Please for the love of CHESS! STOP RESIGNING.

Whenever I’m finally doing good in a game people realize “oh snap, my queens gone” and then they resign.
Avatar of Way-of-Pain

But... someone said I should playing on in lost positions and resign. Who to obey? I'm very very confusey. shock.png

Avatar of MichaelWesten909

If you want to play on, play on. If you want to resign, resign. To each his own. 

I could see how playing out a bad or lost position could be useful for working on efficiency or resourcefulness, or perhaps being able to learn from your opponents moves, but if you're lost and you dont want to play then whatever. 

Avatar of keep1teasy
doodoochessplayer wrote:
Please for the love of CHESS! STOP RESIGNING.

Whenever I’m finally doing good in a game people realize “oh snap, my queens gone” and then they resign.

so?

Avatar of Yu-Hopkins
doodoochessplayer wrote:
Please for the love of CHESS! STOP RESIGNING.

Whenever I’m finally doing good in a game people realize “oh snap, my queens gone” and then they resign.

Don't tell me what to do. 

Avatar of Gunther-Ratsinburger

yes, stand there and take your beating like someone getting court martialled thumbup.png

Avatar of snoozyman
No
Avatar of xXHazzaBXx

Honestly, I don't see why people are complaining about this. Your opponent can either resign in a losing position or they can force you to play on and hope you make mistakes; just take your free ELO points and start a new game.

Avatar of AussieMatey

Except, you resigned today, 2 pawns down, on the 9th move.

Avatar of AnxiousPetrosianFan

Tbh I don't think it's weak, it's a game afterall. I'm trying to become a stronger player but I think the sort of opposition I play around 1400-1500 like me aren't super grandmasters but they're good enough that a minor piece or rook difference SHOULD be enough of a difference to decide the game. That said if I lose a minor piece I'll usually play on and see if they can convert the win, but if I've blundered my Queen the game is almost certainly over so why continue with maybe a 2% chance of winning when I can play another game with (at the start) maybe 50% chance of winning

Avatar of Jimemy
xXHazzaBXx skrev:

Honestly, I don't see why people are complaining about this. Your opponent can either resign in a losing position or they can force you to play on and hope you make mistakes; just take your free ELO points and start a new game.

I can see why its an issue. Like OP is sub 500 in Blitz. I can understand why he feel the need to play games to the end. Like at that level is probably very good to play to the end so you can practice it. Like how to mate with a king and queen or how to mate with king and rook. Like if you are maybe 1500 then you dont have to play out the queen king ending, you know how its going to end. 

Avatar of canadian_rt
JamesClrrke wrote:
It’s just kids. By whatever one wants to call it, quitting is weak. Quitting because something ‘gets hard’ (ie: loses a queen) is a character flaw. To each their own? Sure. Your choice to be weak.

I can't really see how you're any better considering the multiple circumstances you've resigned in your games.
Such as this one: https://www.chess.com/game/live/35343450897
You played like 1 extra move and then resigned
As well as this one: https://www.chess.com/game/live/35166459125
And this one: https://www.chess.com/game/live/34916970905
Would you like more examples?

On a side note: If I'm already on tilt and I hang a Queen in Blitz, you bet I'm going to resign. It's just interesting you make this point when you're the same.
Feel free to tell me that you don't care about my opinion and that I don't have a life as well as to touch some grass.

Avatar of MaskedHero2

if people want to play the game, they will. If they don't, they will resign

Avatar of PLAYERIII

I have to disagree about that…

 

When I lose two minor pieces for a rook, for example, I usually resign because, in my opinion, the best way to learn isn’t to checkmate or get checkmated; it’s to play accurately and know the right time to attack your opponent.

Avatar of keep1teasy
CooloutAC wrote:
PLAYERIII wrote:

I have to disagree about that…

 

When I lose two minor pieces for a rook, for example, I usually resign because, in my opinion, the best way to learn isn’t to checkmate or get checkmated; it’s to play accurately and know the right time to attack your opponent.

most experts say never to resign.  

most experts tell lower rated people to never resign.

Avatar of keep1teasy

aren't we all lol

Avatar of keep1teasy
CooloutAC wrote:
B1ZMARK wrote:

aren't we all lol

many of us are not.   Which makes it all the more shameful.   Even in OTB the little kids nowadays will never resign.   Especially silly to resign in blitz.

i played otb yesterday against a 1500 (i am 2029)

I dropped a pawn, then lost an exchange and two more pawns, but in the end he got too excited at the prospect of winning.

 

then, i proceeded to win two more games and draw a 2120 for $175 

Avatar of canadian_rt
CooloutAC wrote:
B1ZMARK wrote:
CooloutAC wrote:
PLAYERIII wrote:

I have to disagree about that…

 

When I lose two minor pieces for a rook, for example, I usually resign because, in my opinion, the best way to learn isn’t to checkmate or get checkmated; it’s to play accurately and know the right time to attack your opponent.

most experts say never to resign.  

most experts tell lower rated people to never resign.

Which to them is anyone under 2000 fide rating lol.  But I resign at the drop of a hat because I'm too weak minded and emotional.

I am also a very emotional player as well. Some games I'll resign the moment I drop a pawn in the opening cause I'm already very pissed off at myself. Some games I'll play until they mate me, even down a queen.

Avatar of IsraeliGal

I will never understand why people bother complaining about someone resigning when theyre a queen down.

Like you really have a sadistic problem. Im 100% sure none of you people who complain would actually continue yourself in a position like that.

Avatar of keep1teasy
JamesClrrke wrote:
Funny that a guy calling himself ‘Bizmark’ would advocate quitting. He apparently knows little of history and the irony in his use of it. Bismarck was tough as nails and the battleship named for him didn’t quit until it was on the bottom. Ah well…..kids today😏

That’s cool, except the example I posted was about me not quitting.