What do you feel about players that do perpetual checks when they are losing?

Say you're beating someone and aren't that far away from a mate.  Say he somehow breaks through your defense with a queen and begins checking you all over the board.  What do you feel about this?  I was winning a game pretty handidly and my opponent sacrificed a pawn in order to give his queen open space to check me.  It was in a position in the board where I didn't have a shield for my king and so he could have checked me as many times as he wanted.  I think it's pretty cheap. 

I think it's part of the game to have good king safety. Why'd you accept the sac anyway? You should've saw it coming. 

It's a legitimate drawing mechanism

If your opponent is able to perpetually check your King, you are in no sense "handily winning."  You sold out your King's security to obtain a material advantage.

Nah, I think if someone is beating me pretty good and has proven to be the better player, I'm not going to do a bunch of checks that lead to nothing just so I can collect points.  It might be part of the game, but it's cheap and pathetic. 

It's a great--and classic--way to draw a game. 

I had two rooks to his one.  He had a knight that was pinned on the back rank by my queen and my bishop was in play to take that knight.  It just happened to be that the board was wide open, but my king was never in any danger because he could not move his pieces.  He literally had to check me every time or he would have lost. 

Hardest thing to win is a won game.

If I were in the losing position, I'd be doing everything I could to find some way to get a draw, or even a win, out of the situation. Nothing cheap about it. 1/2 point is better than 0 points.

You're clearly not the better player if you can't do defense. 

I think that they were not actually losing.

This is my one beef with chess.  You shouldn't award someone a draw just because he can check your king all over the board and be real cheap about it.  There should be a cut off point to the amount of useless checks you can make in order to secure a cheap draw.

No, you shouldn't be awarded a win for failing to protect against this tactic.

How is this possible?  He had no way to checkmate me and he was down in pieces and was in danger of being mated in two moves.  I can do defense, as well, in response to the other poster.  It just happened to be a weird game how the formation of the board was. 

lol what a joke.  He was only able to draw due to the rules of the game.  Make no mistake he was losing on material. actually, looking at the game, he had a queen a rook and two panws.  I had a queen, two rooks a bishop and 5 pawns plus I had his king in REAL danger.  I guess he was tied with me. 

It's your own fault for ignoring the protection of your king. Instead of being a sore loser and complaining about it on the forums, learn from this experience and protect your king better next time.

Perpetual check is part of the game.  Contrast this with xiangqi where such repetition is against the rules.

the only way he was able to get away with this is because both my rooks where in the back rank and I had nothing to get behind.  I could have ran to the pawns but that would be playing into his hand.  I was just kind of pissed cause I had been schooling him the entire game and for him to get by like that was cheap in my opinion.  That was his strategy, when you look at it.  He just started advancing his pawn in order to force me to take it so his queen could come down and check away and save his sorry a66

Did your opponent win the game? I'm confused because of lack of commas.

WalhallaRoad, I guess that you also don´t like stalemates, right?