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

For the record, you're not adding anything either.

I agree, even if I am the only one apparently.

If you can't win, then you must look for a way to draw...and perpetual check is one such way. There are not two outcomes to this game...but three.

OK, I was going to post on this (still will), and as I'm figuring out how to properly indicate a quote here, I see that someone else beat me to it.

I'm going to (re)acknowledge this bon mot, nonetheless.

I know it was probably inadvertant - but the quote above... is just about the funniest thing I have seen in these forums.  Classic.

If it was a true perpetual check (i.e., a repeated position) there actually is a cut off point to the number of checks: it's five (three iterations of the same check with another check between each).

It wasn't perpetual; with each check he chased your king further away from your defenses into a position where you could be checkmated.

Your points about awarding him a draw, and the checks being "useless" are invalid and irrelevant, because the game wasn't a draw; you lost because you neglected the security of your king.

What a joke.

That is a legal part of the game and you must learn to accept it. Grandmasters do it.

When you misplay the opening and have a worse position in the middlegame you stop fighting? Do you start to think things like "I don´t deserve to win this game, I have played so bad" or something similar?

Anything within the framework of the Chess rules should be acceptable to all players. Those who do not like the application of rules should find themselves a different game-- perhaps a game with rules that are more acceptable to them.

LEARN TO PLAY THIS GAME!

That's part of the game. Nothing wrong with it.

YES IT IS CONFLAGURATION_PLANET!!!

no problem with that, rules are rules

Being able to convert a won position is a skill you have to learn, and blaming your opponent when you fail is lame. 

As a 12 yo, I naively played an opening line that was claimed to be equal and I realized I would be lucky to draw. I saw that if I let my opponent win a piece I would be able to draw by a crazy perpetual check with my queen checking his king all over the board. I took the draw and regard it as one of my best games and lessons in chess. Since then I've won many games playing into popular theoretically innacurate assesments and watching my oppenents collapse when they met unexpected problems. 

Whining about being swindled means you need to learn how to shut down counterplay.

Perpetual check is a perfectly valid resource to take advantage of, not some inferior tactic to look down upon. If your opponent did not account for this, then his material superiority (if any) is irrelevant. A draw is a draw.

What if you were in a situation where you are losing and figure out a perpectual check draw?

Would you say this is not how i should play and resign?

Would Chuck Norris play by the rules and allow you to sneak off with a perpetual check followed by a checkmate ?

Of course not!

You know better, kindest regards and admiration, Zapped

The problem with feeback is that you need a sensor, when screaming in forums does not demonstrate one.

Perpetual check is a part of tactics, and it's not easy to find and force upon the opponent. Try to force a perpetual check every time you are losing. It's not an easy task, at all. For me, it's a brilliant manouver that only adds to the beauty of Chess.

If you didn't see it coming, he outplayed you, and he brilliantly managed to draw a lost game.