It appears the powers have taken away the ability to abort the game before making your first move. The abort button has been replaced with a draw button. This is my guess at least.
What is the deal with people wanting me to resign?
Sort:
If there is still something for you or your opponent to learn in the game then keep playing on. Especially in an endgame.
BeasyLogical wrote:
It appears the powers have taken away the ability to abort the game before making your first move. The abort button has been replaced with a draw button. This is my guess at least.
That apparently happens when you abort too often.
Apr 6, 2023
0
#6
I actually made a post about a similar topic, and whether I should resign more when it is clearly losing. Someone responded in a way I found helpful, and I'll paste it here:
"Some will be annoyed by you not resigning. Some will be annoyed by you resigning. Some will be annoyed by your username. You can't please everyone.
Resignation option is there for you. You resign because you do not want to continue defending a position not worth defending. You do not do it to please (or avoid annoying) your opponent."
I think there is logic to not resigning, especially at our level (from looking at your profile I see we are at approximately the same level). From my experience, a lot of lost positions can swing to the other side if one person messes up badly (which still happens). Plus, the purpose of playing here is chess and, for a lot of people, chess improvement. I think it is beneficial to have experience defending lost positions (this is what a higher rated friend told me) and to practice conversion (which in my experience can be HIGHLY nontrivial), so not resigning can have benefits for both sides.
That said, maybe you can consider resigning if let's say you have like a king left or it is completely obvious the ending sequence. Still, up to you. And who knows! Stalemate is always possible. As a case in point, I had a rapid game today against an opponent who was left with a king against my two queens, and my opponent had about 10 seconds left while I had significantly more time. For some reason, I couldn't stand the idea of winning on time and REALLY wanted to win by checkmate, so I aggressively tried to premove a checkmate and ended up stalemating. Sad, but it happened in a 1600 level rapid game lol.
I really don't agree that you are obligated to resign. Some people like to mess with people who don't resign, including one of my friends who enjoys underpromoting in those scenarios. Guess they are free to do so, and you are free to resign if you see that happening. But still, I feel like it is all still voluntary.
Having people get mad at you about it is really unpleasant, though. You can always report them for verbal abuse -- you aren't supposed to act that way on this site, anyway. Or you can consider turning off the chat. But no, I don't think your uncle Ben was wrong. I think that not resigning does have its benefits for chess development, and encourages resilience, which is a positive quality in chess. I've seen a lot of people resign prematurely against me in chess games, and I always feel that that is a pity.
What happens if your opponent blunders their queen or leaves and easy check mate opening...
Apr 7, 2023
0
#8
This is dependent on elo and the position. Below 1000, never resign. They can mess up the mate, stalemate, blunder a piece, you make them prove it. From about 1000-1200, probably resign if they’re up a queen and theres no real activity in your position. From 1200-1400, up a rook is usually going to be the tipping point.
The higher the elo, the more likely it is everything just gets traded down and you’re just down material in a very easily losing endgame. It’s rarely entertaining to play absolutely dominated positions and frankly wastes both players time at higher elo. It’s online chess, we can move onto the next match quickly.
The higher the elo, the more likely it is everything just gets traded down and you’re just down material in a very easily losing endgame. It’s rarely entertaining to play absolutely dominated positions and frankly wastes both players time at higher elo. It’s online chess, we can move onto the next match quickly.
Apr 7, 2023
0
#9
Kielmog wrote:
This is dependent on elo and the position. Below 1000, never resign. They can mess up the mate, stalemate, blunder a piece, you make them prove it. From about 1000-1200, probably resign if they’re up a queen and theres no real activity in your position. From 1200-1400, up a rook is usually going to be the tipping point.
The higher the elo, the more likely it is everything just gets traded down and you’re just down material in a very easily losing endgame. It’s rarely entertaining to play absolutely dominated positions and frankly wastes both players time at higher elo. It’s online chess, we can move onto the next match quickly.
The higher the elo, the more likely it is everything just gets traded down and you’re just down material in a very easily losing endgame. It’s rarely entertaining to play absolutely dominated positions and frankly wastes both players time at higher elo. It’s online chess, we can move onto the next match quickly.
That makes sense to me, and in practice I do resign a lot of games that I am confident I will lose. One can argue, though, that there is still value in learning how to best defend, or learning to convert well. And there are exceptions to every rule.
Yesterday I played the following rated rapid game. I think my opponent was right to not resign on move 36 when it was clear his gamble had failed. The eval at move 55 is like +1 lol. And at the end I think he resigned in part because of being low on time.
Uncle Ben told me to never resign- i've followed that advice since before I was a 900. I have grown in the past 4 years of playing chess, but since the begining, i've always gotten flack for not resigning.
True, I get on a tilt and resign here and there, but general rule of themb is to never resign. However, (especially recently) I've seen my opponents verbally berate me, throw powning emojis in the chat, and outright teabag me in a sign of complete and utter dominance over my pathetic chess ability.
My spirit is breaking.
was ben wrong?