I have a friend who is a kid without hobbits.
why do some poeple never resiging in online chess?
Sort:
Oct 27, 2014
0
#23
I'm gay and tolerant and I agree with GM-Maggy!
(P.S.: It's rich of you to describe others as a "pompous ass", look in the mirror!)
I played a fella a few months ago and I was losing so sacked all my pieces hoping for a stalemate...
Turns out this fella didnt know how to checkmate with a king queen and a few pawns..
He promoted his 3 remaining pawns into queens while i moved my king into position for stalemate...
OP - Playing for stalemate is a tactic aswell...
well a lot of the time if you overcomplicate a losing position your opponent may make a mistake/blunder and you could possibly be back in the game
That or hope that they lose on time. -shrugs-
Oct 27, 2014
0
#27
tjepie wrote:
VyboR schreef:
"No game was ever won by resigning" - Saviely Tartakower
i have won lot´s of games by resignation. and also lost a lot of them by resignation.
tartakower was a good player butt his qwuotes, while mostly funny are also ontreu ore just stupid.
axamples
´it is always better to saccrofise your oppents men´
´Some part of a mistake is always correct´
What's wrong with these citations? Both are true.
BobBlanks schreef:
I played a fella a few months ago and I was losing so sacked all my pieces hoping for a stalemate...
Turns out this fella didnt know how to checkmate with a king queen and a few pawns..
He promoted his 3 remaining pawns into queens while i moved my king into position for stalemate...
OP - Playing for stalemate is a tactic aswell...
facing a opponent who does not know how to checkmate sounds like a -1000 rating. i am above that level
Sred schreef:
tjepie wrote:
VyboR schreef:
"No game was ever won by resigning" - Saviely Tartakower
i have won lot´s of games by resignation. and also lost a lot of them by resignation.
tartakower was a good player butt his qwuotes, while mostly funny are also ontreu ore just stupid.
axamples
´it is always better to saccrofise your oppents men´
´Some part of a mistake is always correct´
What's wrong with these citations? Both are true.
sacofising your oppents men is called capturing. only your opppenent can sacrofise them. and i i give away my queen one the tird move at f3 so that your knight can take is not correct. and no part of it is correct.
Oct 27, 2014
0
#30
There are blunders in all levels even GMS. one can hope for it by not resigning.
GM_Maggy wrote:
I swear, when I play someone who does not resign I will troll them so badly that he never plays on in hopeless positions again ;)
Challenge accepted.
Oct 27, 2014
0
#33
tjepie wrote:
here is an ather example
Oh you didn't prompte the H pawn! play it again
It would be pertinent to mention that not all players actually know how to serve a checkmate within an appropriate amount of moves or depending on the situation, at all. There's always hope. Sure if a position if well and truly lost, perhaps resigning isn't such a bad idea.
Please resign next time after 14...Ng4, continuing after that was just embarrassing yourself.
Why don't people resign?
This is the Ultimate Question of Chess. New and new topics every few weeks and no answer whatsoever so far (except from "because it's not obligatory"). It's good to keep pondering though.
You're right, it isn't obligatory. Anyway if the game is "over" to you, you can always start up another game or begin premature analysis of your current game or start a forum post. Whatever is more befitting.
Perhaps our opponent cannot see the end is in sight ? Or they'd rather lose by checkmate then resignation.
I only resign very occassionally (even if the position is hopeless for me) in the somewhat slim hope that my opponent blunders...
mokerslag wrote:
Please resign next time after 14...Ng4, continuing after that was just embarrassing yourself.
That's why people don't resign, you're playing at a very low level.
Improve and more people resign.
^^
In live bullet or blitz chess, I would just resign if the game is lost for me or it is a monumental task to overcome a strong opponent clearly winning with little counter play.
Correspondence chess is deserving of giving myself "more time" to consider any traps or moves to fool my opponent into wild sacrifices, if it doesn't materialise i would just resign.
"No game was ever won by resigning" - Saviely Tartakower
i have won lot´s of games by resignation. and also lost a lot of them by resignation.
tartakower was a good player butt his qwuotes, while mostly funny are also ontreu ore just stupid.
axamples
´it is always better to saccrofise your oppents men´
´Some part of a mistake is always correct´