The etiquette of resigning

I have a lot to learn in this game, and I find it very discouraging when people harangue me for not resigning early enough to fit their fancy. Getting soundly trounced can also teach something. I'm not talking about playing on in an endgame king and queen vs king, or something silly like that, however people have recently gotten frustrated with me playing an endgame a pawn or two down. There is still a lot I can learn from that, and I don't think that there is as much mental stress in your average chess.com game as there is in a tournament. I guess I will just hope for more relaxed opponents in the future. :)

yeah, its been said if theres something to learn from a position you should play on. if you know someone has a winning position but dont know how then watch and learn :)

This seems contradictory, if you know that someone has a winning position but you don't know how they should win, then you don't know they have a winning position.

Sure, makes sense.  I've never played OTB at a club or tournament. No one can put up with me in person . . . 

--Cystem

for example- you have heard 2B vs lone king is a win, but you have no clue how it is done, so you play on and the better opponent plays it out

Well, there are 'won' endings where a certain technique is required, and you are totally within your rights to ask your oppononent to demonstrate that he knows the technique.

At my level, my opponent will have to show that he knows how to mate with 2 bishops. Perhaps I wont play till mate, if I can see he knows what he's doing.

A few years ago GM Epishin failed to win a Bishop and Knight ending....

I don't know about you guys but I've never resigned!!!

yeah, the B+N ending can be a fickle one.. my friend is 1250 rated and underpromotes and does it all the time (and can succeed every time) but then theres higher rated players who struggle with it. I would always play that one out as its a hard one

cystem wrote: they demand the vanquished behave in a particular way to express proper respect of their betters. The problem is, they don't all like their egos stroked in the same way,

This makes sense to me. In chess where people make such a big deal about respect its odd to me how the chess cliches like lowly pawn, pathetic queen lost in the corner and so much other disrespectful talk toward the opponent or pieces is standard. like chess dweeb said:

     "It's their psyche that is getting crushed if they don't. Albeit somewhat annoying for the person with the winning position, he/she may take solace in the fact that every move on the board is another blow to your pitiful opponent. People that don't resign in lost positions against me pay dearly."

    Is that not pathetic and disrespectful yet totally common? In other sports people who like to hurt others intentionally we call bush league or dirty players. Yet I hear this crap in books, videos and interviews with GMs. Now they want me to bend down and ask for there mercy because they declare a game won half way through. Hypocritical, ironic, wounded?

 I dont understand how moving plastic pieces on a board is crushing or they pay dearly or get their teeth kicked in as Ive heard. Must be for the obsessed. Now in kick boxing if you resign early that makes sense, but chess come on, really!

I believe if a position is untenable or obviously lost, like King and Queen against King, then resigning as a courtesy is acceptable. In a way, disrespect carries on at the GM level, where you expect your opponent to make the best continuation. Things like being down the exchange in an otherwise equal endgame are also resignable as you go higher up on the scale. Against a lesser opponent though, why not play on as long as there is a hope of victory with a disadvantage like that?

I personally resign positions that I know are beyond me and are within the capabilities of my opponent. If I drop the exchange, I fight on. If I am down a pawn or two, I fight on. If it is a matter of technique with Rook and King, I resign. At the same time, I think it is satisfying for my opponent, at the end of a spectacular combination or tactic, to receive the satisfaction of delivering mate or reaping the rewards before I go down.

Weird? Maybe.

I wonder how some of these posters view Byrne v. Fischer, the 1956 "Game of the Century" (one of many, of course, to be given that label)?  According to the stories, rather than resign, Byrne thought he was actually paying a tribute to Fischer's good play by continuing on and allowing Fischer (then age 13) the satisfaction of seeing checkmate.  This was related in footnote #12 on the Wikipedia entry for Game of the Century http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Game_of_the_Century_(chess) .  But some of our contributers to this thread would have thought they were being dissed by Byrne, and would have walked off in a huff after finishing the win.

--Cystem

I guess I have to resign in this position

That was actually exactly what I was thinking of when I wrote I would be more than happy to let them finish a great combination. I've heard of that rumour, and I hope that it's a truth; it shows great sportsmanship.

well its a mate in 1 so it might not make much of a difference ;)

Obviously it varies as ability progresses. When my kids (9 and 6) play it always ends in checkmate, but when Nakamura is playing Carlson - they genuinely know how its is going to end when they resign, in fact (if they wanted to after the fact) they could probably both fill out the scoresheet to checkmate and likely have the name moves recorded.  Your mileage may vary.

I have a general rule, if we switched positions, could I win with certainty?  If the answer is yes, then I resign.  I feel no need to make a player prove they can beat me when my own ineptitude is what got me in a lost position.  Being down material is not grounds for calling it quits, but being genuinely beaten is.

Sure, while they COULD blunder into a royal fork . . . that would not diminish my mistakes.  I play the game to get better, not to prove I can commit one less f' up then the other guy and preserve some mythical rating that I obviously don't deserve.  If I hang my queen on move 10 and have hit the resign button against a player I know I should have beaten - THAT is a learning experience. 

Every week, another thread about resigning.

 You just make sure you are careful! 

 There really shouldn't be people asking you to resign. 

I think the better my competion the more at ease i am with my self when i resign. for instance if im playing someone alot better than myself and i am really down I ask my self " will my opponet make a big time mistake"? probly not....will a weaker player?   mabie so...