What is the propper "chess etiquette" for giving up a match

Hello, I am a noobie, as you probably can see from my profile. I've been playing a lot this week, but still have a lot to learn.

A couple of days ago I had a bit of a rough moment with another player in my rating. He used the chat to ask me to give up the match (I was at a clear disadvantaged, the match would have finished already with any experienced player). I argued that people from our rating should be practing how to force a checkmate as well, but I ended up giving up the match on the next round.

So I would like to know if there are some expected rules in relation to that. I understand that it is very boring forcing a checkmate with a queen and a king, especially when both parts involved know what they are doing, but it is not always the case in my rating, I've played matches where the opponent clearly didn't know how to force a checkmate. Should I give up the match even in this case? Is it against fair play to try to win by the clock if the other person is also a begginer?

Thank you for your attention in advanced

Resign when you feel you have nothing left to play for. If you think your opponent may have problems checkmating, or you can't see how you could be mated and want to learn, play on.

If you were playing OTB, where you could discuss with your opponent after the game, that decision may be different. Playing on in a completely lost game, may limit the likelihood of being able to get pointers from your opponent.

I resign when I know I have no chances and feel my opponent will have no problems converting to mate. But no one is under an obligation to resign 

Are you talking about a match or a single game?

A match you should never give up or withdraw unless you have to leave for some reason or you just don’t want to play anymore.

In a game, I recommend playing until you are dead lost, have no hope of a stalemate or swindle, and there is no possibility to make a fortress. In other words, your opponent has a very clear, straightforward, simple way to checkmate, and plenty of time on the clock. This may be adjusted depending on the strength of your opponent. For example, I once played an IM rated 2600. He won a piece in a nice tactic. I carefully searched for any way for me to complicate the struggle or have any compensation for the piece. Finding nothing, I resigned. That was as much due to his rating as anything. You don’t have to do this. You can play every game to checkmate if you wish, but some of your opponents might get grumpy or feel disrespected. But it is your decision, not theirs.

NEVER RESIGN!!!! There is a chance the opponent will lose on time, or stalemate you. This has happened to me many times before! DONT RESIGN.

also how do i unfollow discussions

Nobody can tell you when to resign. That decision is yours alone.

Your opponent was not very polite doing that. For me is perfect understandable when someone doesn't resign (in a clearly losing position), it doesn't bother me and I just play on until I checkmate him.

There are a few points here: 

1. There'ss time control, so sometimes you win with a losing position because your opponent's clock runs out. This is what time control is about, some people get angry when they lose on time, they might offend you, it's their problem, you did nothing wrong.

2. Using chat to ask you to resign was very unpolite and he should be reported by lack of sportsmanship (my opinion). 

3. There are no rules about it, if he wants to win he just has to win, you are free to not resign.

4. In begginer level, ANYTHING can happen, so don't resign ever. Sometimes your opponent is up material but then he just blunders the queen and then the rook and now you're winning, or sometimes you can achieve checkmate even down 12 points because he didn't see a mate in 2.

5. Every time you lose, you learn a way to win. Resigning is just losing points for nothing.

I am a beginner too playing since maybe 5-6 weeks.

Just ignore it and keep playing. At least that is what I do .. even I fI lose the game with just the King on the board ... Like 2 minutes ago :-)

Later you can analyze the game and learn from the blunder or bad movements ...

 Is it against fair play to try to win by the clock if the other person is also a begginer? NO!!! Time management is a really important part of your strategy! So if he uses all his time just to be up material, it's his problem. 

next time tell him to resign..ask him if he is scared. haha. i usually resign when i am over it. 

I think the Queen's gambit series did a good job of showing how it used to be: if you lose a queen early on, you should just resign. You should also resign endgames that are just lost. K+Q vs K just resign. In big tournaments, especially when there was money on the line, you'd get some strong player using antics like flagging the opponent in completely drawn endgames etc., but you wouldn't find it much elsewhere. Regretfully, at least to me, the rise and popularity of a certain super-GM that frequently uses all kinds of antics to win completely drawn positions or not lose lost positions has shifted the consensus more towards anything goes. So even at my level you'll find players playing on after blundering early on and never resigning, even when you have plenty of time. Even though it's within their rights, I still find that the most frustrating part of playing chess online. Conclusion: I wish it were differently, but you can pretty much decide for yourself to play on if you want to. Not everyone is going to be nice about it though.

^ trufax

1. If flagging is bad, why do we play with time control?

2. If you use more time to reach an equal position, therefore is not a drawn, and you lose.

3. You are calling simple aspects of the game "antics". Lose on time = Lose, even with "winning" positions.

Even down material you can use your pieces to achieve tactical themes and win material back or checkmate. 

i think he is saying the soul of the game will be lost if we promote the idea to keep playing this way..:flagging" and or playing for a stalemate..where it kinda get more like poker than Chess. not saying clocks arent  fun as hell...but to put as much emphasis on it as you do the genius combos is not "the ancient game".

I disagree totally. 

i understand why....its a tad "gatekeeping" but...tis a romantic history to the game so people are sentimental about it.

I think giving up because of one blunder is much more against the spirit of the game. It's a battle.

Finding it frustrating just means you are not psychologicaly prepared to play chess.