Why do so many resign early?

I don't know about terms of service and all that, but my kid visits this site, so I'd certainly appreciate it if we could mostly refrain from referring to one another as inappropriate parts of the digestive tract.

But then, I'm not a paying member, so maybe the paying members with kids feel differently.

Either way, I'm a big fan of resigning.  I just resigned as white from this position.

From move four of the d6 Open Sicilian, we might have traveled along one of the paths from a classic Karpov-Kasparov world championship match, deviating only when we believe we found a way we could steer the game in interesting new directions that might prove too difficult for our opponent.  Or we might have entered open gladitorial combat in a Yugoslav Dragon, where we test each other's nerves and wits as we race to mate each others' kings, with the balance of the game hanging on every move.  Or we might have gone into a Scheveningen and you might have dared me to challenge you with my Keres, confident that despite its brutal reputation that you, as a frequent defender, know its ins and outs better than I ever could, and challenged me to prove my case over the board.

But no, 4...e5.

At three days per move time controls, I couldn't imagine facing the disappointment every time I logged in for the next month or more.  So I just hung up the phone.  There are more interesting paths to travel, and only so many of them a man can travel in one lifetime.

thats an easy win.... Bb5+

I resigned a few of my recent games early simply because I'm on pain meds that severely affect judgment and perception, so I was dropping pieces and doing things I normally wouldn't do. I figured I'll drop a hundred points or so and then come back once my mind is clear again.

I think you may have missed the point.

I certainly did:) What was the point in resigning that position?

I don't see why I'd bother rewriting the entire thing, so I'll just chalk it up to divergent worldviews.

Be careful though. If u resign too often in the opening the staff might think that you're sandbagging.

@fairyprincess: I've re-read your original post too, and it went over my head.

my sincerest appologies, I completely understand what you are saying, I figure its a matter of taste, I understand that you don't want to be given wins right out of the opening, I just think maybe its more valuable to demonstrate to your opponents why something is Pardon my toned down French, Bullocks... (lol in my household if I said that my family would give me wierd looks)

To the contrary, I don't think Bb5 wins at all.  I just don't think the game that is bound to ensue is likely to be particularly fascinating.  Not because of the nature of the move -- which gets played occasionally by even strong players -- but because the kind of person who plays 4...e5 when all those potentially captivating games lie waiting down all those other paths isn't the sort of person I want to spend the next month+ of my life waking up every day and strategizing against in a battle of wills and minds.

Life is too short to waste on anything but the genuinely interesting, unless you're spellbound by rating points.  And I'm not.

good than you might have fun with a King's Gambit or two... they rarely stay Quotidian for long

If you are down material with no counterplay and the end is nigh then it is good etiquette and saves embarrassment to resign. On the other hand, you are under zero obligation to do so and you shouldn't let anyone make you feel bad for playing to the bitter end. just don't expect a rematch or any other future games with said person.

I'd agree with you, but I'm going to have to go look up quotidian first.

I just re-read the OP,it still makes little sense to me,the OP describes dropping a queen as "things(in the game are) getting a bit distressed" but thats insufficient reason to resign.What then is a sufficient reason? I'd rather start a new game than play out a lost one to it's inevitable conclusion.Earlier in this thread,Doggy_Style stated something insightful,many players "resign because the game is over, as a proper contest." I think there is much truth to that statement.

Well, I didn't expect my first thread here to spark a multi-layered controversy. 

Clearly the barometer and conditions for resigning are different for many, and much more routine than I had expected.

I suspect my anticipation was that playing others through chess.com was considered a learning environment, and that a too-soon resignation would have been impolite to one's opponent... which was why I never did until all avenues were exhausted.

And likewise, when a game with a stronger opponent went to 69 moves, he down to just a King and a pawn, I wasn't impatient that he didn't resign.

Oh well. Thanks for all the input... I have a better (good) understanding of the ettiquite involved here.

I would say to just play for as long as you think you have a chance to stop your opponent from winning. I think it's nice to give respect to your opponent by resigning, but it's clearly not necessary. The rules are to play to checkmate or draw.

You resign when you want to resign for whatever reasons seem adequate to you. Nobody in the world has the right to say it was either too soon or not soon enough because it's not their call - it's yours. If they don't like that then they will not like the game of chess.

Fairy_Princess wrote:

jetfighter13 wrote:

good than you might have fun with a King's Gambit or two... they rarely stay Quotidian for long

I'd agree with you, but I'm going to have to go look up quotidian first.

It means something very routine its almost an everyday occurance

@chess_gg, I take your point that I could have done as you did and just resigned (therefore the suffering was partially self-inflicted), but to be honest the thought never even crossed my mind, it was win the game now and worry about everything else later.