For anyone who doesn't already understand that this is a question a real chess player would not ask - perpetual check is a part of the rules of chess (like the en passant rule, viewed as an unfair capture by some players 
) - here is a list of brilliantly drawn games, including some drawn by perpetual check.
Awesome draws (chessgames.com)
Vladimir Kramnik vs Viswanathan Anand (Wijk aan Zee Corus 2004)
X_PLAYER_J_X, well put. I still remember the butthurt some kid at school gave me when I had indeed sacrificed for an attack, realized it wasn't working out, and bailed out into a perpetual. Apparently I should have carried on trying to win so he could beat me fair and square, or something.
mm ok .. butthurt from some kid at school ... might be on the wrong thread lol. *Jokes* :0
I was talking about him *being* butthurt, in case it's unclear. 
For anyone who doesn't already understand that this is a question a real chess player would not ask - perpetual check is a part of the rules of chess (like the en passant rule, viewed as an unfair capture by some players ) - here is a list of brilliantly drawn games, including some drawn by perpetual check.
Awesome draws (chessgames.com)
Vladimir Kramnik vs Viswanathan Anand (Wijk aan Zee Corus 2004)
That pgn's not working for me, I am the only one?
Unlikely, but the diagram and link work perfectly here.
It is working fine on my Windows 8.1 machine using Chrome. Not sure what platform you are using, but it has a bug.
Straw poll: can you see the game and link in my post #647, and what platform are you using?
This thread is still alive? Wow.
Imagine you playing for the world championship and 0.5 point make out for you to hold the title; now you are in a situation of perpetual or losing, your choice. Probably you will pick the perpetual check.
Now, a direct answer: it is totally legal; the time and opponent caught me iinto a perpetual check to defend his game, i do not blame him but myself that wasn't cautious enough to prevent the perpetual.
they are noobs and like desperation moves
Going through the link works fine using IE but that's not what I was saying - it's the pgn that wasn't working for me
It wasn't a PGN. It was a diagram posted using the diagram button on this forum. Indeed it was this one (diagrams can be shared between multiple posts. When this is the case, edits of a diagram in one post are seen in the other posts).
Sometimes if I am seriously winning and my opponent has not resigned, I will throw in some (or many) checks to annoy them.
Fascinating! Such an inlogical topic with so many replies. If one side has a perpetual chess the other side has a draw at the best option.
Sometimes if I am seriously winning and my opponent has not resigned, I will throw in some (or many) checks to annoy them.
Personally when I'm seriously winning I prefer to demonstrate that I'm seriously winning by actually winning the game.
If you are "winning" then you should not allow a circumstance in which they can get a draw. If you allow a circumstance where they can draw while you are "winning" then you are not actually winning.
I can imagine that high level players actually watch out for perpetuals when they have an advantage. And on the flip side, high level players who are losing would try to setup a perpetual to save a draw.
This thread is like a dripping tap you hear in the night that won't go away...
By all means folks, keep reviving the thread with comments complaining about it.
I would like to complain about these people who complain all the time...
i like to say retarded you dont even know what youre doing
X_PLAYER_J_X, well put. I still remember the butthurt some kid at school gave me when I had indeed sacrificed for an attack, realized it wasn't working out, and bailed out into a perpetual. Apparently I should have carried on trying to win so he could beat me fair and square, or something.