Nah those are fun to play. Up a full queen? Hell yeah play on!! Now if they're just stalling by running out the clock without making any moves then that's a different story it's just stupid
what is worse - not resigning or demanding a resignation
Sort:
Demanding someone resign is just plain rude--that is worse. Not resigning in a hopeless position simply makes you look stupid even though it is your legal right to play to checkmate.
Demanding something is definitely worse
considering chess.com environment, I always play till I can and many times I win because my opposite lost by time.
Resign is fattaly lost the game.
Continue is to have a chance of draw or win by time.
But your question is what was the worse.
I think that demmand resignation is worse.
Oct 5, 2021
0
#26
In the olden days, it was considered both cowardly and rude to resign in a lost position.
It was expected of you to play on, to show courage in the face of opposition, and to give your opponent the courtesy of completing a well-earned victory.
chessisimagination wrote:
There is nothing wrong with playing a position out (not resigning). We are here to have fun and learn which is more important than "winning".
Agreed, don't let one little thing drive you away from your interests or hobbies.
Oct 5, 2021
0
#28
Demanding a resignation is far worse.
You are within your rights to play on as long as you like. Different people feel differently about resigning.
You are NOT within your rights demanding that your opponent resign.
Oct 9, 2021
0
#29
blueemu wrote:
Demanding a resignation is far worse.
You are within your rights to play on as long as you like. Different people feel differently about resigning.
You are NOT within your rights demanding that your opponent resign.
agreed
One of my favorite trash talks is to say: can you find the resign button or do you search for resign button (when my opponent is losing). I think the initiative of this question is the action of the opponent (not resigning)+ since the game is boring and it’s just matter of time, trash talk makes it more interesting.
Oct 9, 2021
0
#31
I think not resigning is worse. Asking someone to resign is rude. That's all. Not resigning wastes opponent's precious time
#31, not agree. If you talk according the rules, there is no penalty for demanding resign. If you are talking about common sense, clearly the one who doesn’t resign has no reason but to be annoying.
I resign rarely, but I don’t see any issue if someone ask me to resign in a losing position, I just don’t take it and will try to be more annoying on the board.
I resign rarely, but I don’t see any issue if someone ask me to resign in a losing position, I just don’t take it and will try to be more annoying on the board.
Oct 10, 2021
0
#33
goldenbeer wrote:
#31, not agree. If you talk according the rules, there is no penalty for demanding resign.
FIDE rules:
12.6 It is forbidden to distract or annoy the opponent in any manner whatsoever. This includes
unreasonable claims, unreasonable offers of a draw or the introduction of a source of
noise into the playing area
12.7 Infraction of any part of Articles 12.1 to 12.6 shall lead to penalties in accordance with
Article 13.4.
12.8 Persistent refusal by a player to comply with the Laws of Chess shall be penalised by loss
of the game. The arbiter shall decide the score of the opponent
You mean... "no penalty" except that the arbiter can declare that you've forfeited the game because of your unsportsmanlike conduct distracting or annoying the opponent?
No, you are NOT allowed to demand that the opponent resign.
Oct 17, 2021
0
#34
Are there any circumstances where the other player is so dead lost that it is okay to politely suggest that maybe they should consider resigning?
I have played out correspondence games where the other player only has a King left and versus King and Queen and pawns. They have played super slowly and dragged the game on for weeks more. Probably because they did not want to lose the rating points, and were optimistically hoping for a timeout or account closure. That is all entirely within the rules but is not good sportsmanship.
Oct 17, 2021
0
#35
Demanding a resignation is worse because you are giving away the chance to torture your opponent. So foolish.
KevinOSh escreveu:
Are there any circumstances where the other player is so dead lost that it is okay to politely suggest that maybe they should consider resigning?
I have played out correspondence games where the other player only has a King left and versus King and Queen and pawns. They have played super slowly and dragged the game on for weeks more. Probably because they did not want to lose the rating points, and were optimistically hoping for a timeout or account closure. That is all entirely within the rules but is not good sportsmanship.
No
I've beaten people at my rating range down several points of material
And if I want to play until mate just because it's some artistic desire of mine because I think the mate would be pretty or whatever the hell I'm thinking it's my problem and no one can suggest me to resign
But if they're dragging the games on in daily it's bad sportsmanship, they are probably trying to win over timeout
Immaculate_Slayer hat geschrieben:
KevinOSh escreveu:
I have played out correspondence games where the other player only has a King left and versus King and Queen and pawns. They have played super slowly and dragged the game on for weeks more. Probably because they did not want to lose the rating points, and were optimistically hoping for a timeout or account closure. That is all entirely within the rules but is not good sportsmanship.
No
I've beaten people at my rating range down several points of material
And if I want to play until mate just because it's some artistic desire of mine because I think the mate would be pretty or whatever the hell I'm thinking it's my problem and no one can suggest me to resign
But if they're dragging the games on in daily it's bad sportsmanship, they are probably trying to win over timeout
You cannot win with a king only.
I also know those players (>1800) who don't resign in a K vs K+Q. They still go on playing but then resign one move before mate.
FuzzleOIL escreveu:
Immaculate_Slayer hat geschrieben:
KevinOSh escreveu:
I have played out correspondence games where the other player only has a King left and versus King and Queen and pawns. They have played super slowly and dragged the game on for weeks more. Probably because they did not want to lose the rating points, and were optimistically hoping for a timeout or account closure. That is all entirely within the rules but is not good sportsmanship.
No
I've beaten people at my rating range down several points of material
And if I want to play until mate just because it's some artistic desire of mine because I think the mate would be pretty or whatever the hell I'm thinking it's my problem and no one can suggest me to resign
But if they're dragging the games on in daily it's bad sportsmanship, they are probably trying to win over timeout
You cannot win with a king only.
I also know those players (>1800) who don't resign in a K vs K+Q. They still go on playing but then resign one move before mate.
You can effectively stalemate with a king only
#36 I'm in kinda similar situation and was wondering the same as you. That's why I asked the question in the first place. What your opponent is doing is completely rude and in my opinion should be punished in some way. But unfortunately the fact is he is not doing anything wrong by the rules of the game and nothing can be done about it. Your best shot is to take some time and figure out the quickest way how to win it. There is probably forced mate in couple of moves. As for me, I have done both things. Not resigning is usually how I play so it took me literally two months to be kinda rude and confront my opponent about why is he not resigning. I didn't demand resignation but asked for one and it happened only once in a 14 day per move game because Im sick of it and it seems never ending one. I know it looks like I'm having double standards for resignation, but if you give me a chance I can explain why I think its not like that. I am always for letting people decide when they will resign or will they resign at all and should not even be a question. In my opinion its always better to not resign unless you are going to let your clock run out, there is 30+ minutes left on your opponents clock meaning there is plenty of time for him to not drop the win or your opponent is 500+ higher rated than you. In every other scenario game is never over.
Wondering how the 'nay - sayers' react in a situation where their opponent is a full queen down, with no compensation and still plays on with 6 minutes (10') on the clock...
Come on, don't be more catholic than the pope!
Ofcourse, when one is just one piece down...but has a clear time advantage...the initiative...whatsoever > it's definitely not done to ask (not demanding) to resign. But IMHO there are situations where it's more of an insult to play on (by the opponent), than to ask the opponent to resign (by me), so we both can move on to yet another game...
Just my two cents