Survey: How do you treat non-resigners?

whatever

I quilll keel alll of yew

That's just pathetic. You're  proving my point. You had to set up a ridiculous fictitional chess situation which no half decent player would allow to happen.  WHITE IS NOT A QUEEN UP HERE BECAUSE WHITE DOES NOT HAVE ADDITIONAL PIECES. WHITE IS WORTH 9+1=10 points, black is worth 4 points and as far as my maths tells me, 10-4=6 not 9.YOU ARE JUST LOOKING LIKE A FOOL NOW. GO BACK TO YOUR SILLY DRAWING BOARD!!

Easy fellah! it's an easy win for White:

I'm not disputing that, I'm saying white ISN'T a Queen up.I'm saying that this is a simplistic manufactured example used as a useless childish attempt to counteract my argument, without seriously addressing the topic, come back when you have something relevant to say. As I say, ten points minus 4 equals a 6 point differential.Not 9. Fact.

I think that Ziryab's artificial position backs up what you are saying, rather nicely.

To Ziryab....and Fezzik....what position are you talking about? I didn't even bother to look at the most recent position above, I immediately dismissed it as an artificial attempt to try pathetically to counter my argument with a stupid, ill conceived, irrelevant and spuriously flippant chess diagram. If you are referring to the same, you must be a bit thick. OF COURSE PEOPLE SHOUDNT RESIGN UNTIL THEY SEE THE WIN CLEARLY. WHY NOT STATE THE BLEEDIN' OBVIOUS ??AND IN THE TWO EXAMPLES, IF THEY CAN'T SEE THE POSITION IS CLEARLY LOST THEN THEY NEED HELP UNDERSTANDING THE RULES OF CHESS, AND GENERAL HELP WITH THEIR INFANTILE INTELLECT!!! ALL YOU PEDANTIC BRAINLESS FOOLS ARE DOING IS PROVING MY POINT

Black should resign:

In my opinion, still too complex and close to merit resigning.

Houdini gives white about a +.70 advantage here at a depth of around 22, but that is far from decisive; and the mainline puts Black's rook and Knight against white's 2 Knights and Bishop, which is still playable for Black (even if not pleasant).

And it just annoys me how somebody can just take a few words and make up all kinds of crazy, unsupported assumptions about the poster and his methods.

1. I certainly did look at the position for more than 10 seconds, and still support what I said originally: white would probably win if both players were masters, but black can still put up a decent fight. And since white is only rated 1400 and change, chances are that his endgame technique will be sloppy and that all kinds of crazy blunders and missed opportunities will happen (for both sides, but statistically less so for the higher rated player). Really, anything could happen--it just depends on who capitalizes the most on the inevitable future mistakes.

2. I never claimed to know everything about the position, and I used the engine because a) I don't always have time to sit and analyse various positional features and lines, and b) Houdini is a far better at analysis than either of us patzers and can do the same work in seconds that it would take us hours to do.

So, Sinmills puts up a game citing ME as the non resigner, in a half hour live game, naming me without asking my permission, in order to discredit all that I have so far said.AND THE BEST CHESS ENGINE BAR RYBKA SAYS THERE IS STILL PLAY LEFT!!!! And I've only been playing live chess for a month on and off now!!!I don't usually like this form of chess but am trying it out to improve my chess intuition...so again, YOU PROVE MY POINT!! And I believe that pretty soon after this I did resign!! So WHAT'S YOUR POINT ZYRIAB ....APOLOGY ACCEPTED!!if you want to play a proper Chess game say 1 day per move, be my guest and challenge me right NOW!! HOUDINI SAYS EAT YOUR WORDS!!!...

Teary writes..."

And it just annoys me how somebody can just take a few words and make up all kinds of crazy, unsupported assumptions about the poster and his methods."  Thanks for your support Teary, and your objective demolition of Zyriabs post, I'm sure he must have trawled over my matches for hours to utterly fail in discrediting me....so who is the hypocrite NOW??  CHECKMATE!!

Ziryab or however you spell your moniker, put your money where your mouth is.You'll be receiving a chess match challenge shortly. But take my advice, you need to get over yourself and your attention-seeking misplaced, hopelessly discredited attempts to make yourself look even more silly than you do already.

It didn't appear to me as supporting my comments, just a flippant diagram poking funa t my comment about resigning when being a whole Q down. And if you think that the words"brainless", "fool", "pathetic", etc are "foul" language, I should think that only the mildest of soaps should be applied......I notice you are a chess coach with a 2000+ rating. You above all else should know about resigning sportingly when in a definite losing position. If your original diagram was meant to be tongue in cheek and poking mild fun at lost causes, then I failed to see this,  for which I apologise. your motivation, however, for looking at one game of mine is obvious.....to weed out a situation where I should have resigned but didn't...and then we find out that actually it wasn't a done and dusted situation....I was hardly a rook or Q down and materially equal even if positionally flawed with a kn incursing onto my territory. Oh, dear...i made a horrid move...you've never done that before then?

Black is down a queen, but is not ready to resign with three queens in waiting: every pawn is a princess! But, with White to play can cover the entire first rank with a simple manuever that begins with check (every Black queen will suffer immediate execution):

Qg4+

Qh3+

The king can munch a few pawns, then it is a simple matter to find checkmate.

Resigning in chess distinguishes our game/sport from most other arenas of competition. What is poor sportmanship in many endeavors is viewed as obligatory in ours. Consequently, the process of learning when and why to resign leads to plenty of irritation and contentious discussion. Supposedly it is a great insult to a fellow grandmaster when one plays on in a hopeless position, but occasional games between GMs do end in mate (sometimes there is a forfeit due to the refusal to shake hands, too--GMs occasionally offer insults on purpose).

Among children and others playing in events where basic skills are not yet the norm, one should never resign. I've seen hundreds of games where a player with one or more queens against none ended up with a draw due to failure to checkmate.

Among allegedly skilled players, the clock must be considered as well as the position on the board. Yesterday my live play was terrible, dropping me more than 50 points. Even so, I scored a few half-points in hopeless positions and was burned at least once for the same.

After blundering away a piece in the opening, I played on in a hopeless position expecting the clock to become a factor. In the rapid melee of a three minute game, I found counterplay where there should have been none. Eventually my opponent found a checkmate in one that left me with one piece that still could move, but this piece could check the enemy king: hockey time!

Move 47 was an mutual error. I should have played 47.Rd6+; my opponent could have ended the game with 47...Nxd6.

I don't expect anyone to resign. If someone spends 60 minutes to play king vs rook+king against me I will probably not play him again cause it's wasting my time, but I won't take it as an offense either.