I've said this in just about every 'no resigning' thread :P. If someone did that in a real tournament (OTB)... which happens. They've forfeited a learning opportunity because I will refuse to analyze the game with them. IF they resign at the point I consider appropriate... I'll use some of the time they've saved me to show them where they went wrong. People who refuse to resign are only hurting their own progress.
Why don't players resign?
Sort:
Estragon wrote:
Maybe if we could give them better answers, they wouldn't have to keep asking . . .
But they (we) are ever being refreshed. Jack is gone but now there's new people doing the same thing and probably a lot of people asking the same questions Jack answered way back in the 60s. It's innevitable, it's the "circle of life" (I'm going to go throw the heck up now for having referenced a disney movie).
BY THE WAY - pedagogical should only be used with a license. That should be in the forum rules.
AND @Atos - I meant no harm in my response to you earlier. 
(or anyone for that matter)
If I really believe a person is being malicious I have been known to refuse to CM him. I will queen my pawn, underpromote the rest of my pawns, and put them all back on their original squares.
Then he will ask "why don't you finish the game?" I will and did say to him can you check mate me with a King? "no" "Will then why don't you resign?" and he did.
heinzie wrote:
It might be an interesting exercise to find a similar thread for each newly created one
As long as one doesn't start a chess-related thread.
Their resistance has yet to be broken
Yes this is my final answer for one million dollars
wishiwonthatone wrote:
AND @Atos - I meant no harm in my response to you earlier. (or anyone for that matter)
That's okay, I didn't think you did.
I have been at club games where some players are encouraged by the higher ranked players in the club that they should not resign a game but try for a stalemate when they feel they cannot win as sometimes players who are way ahead sometimes get cockey and make a mistake .But it does not happen very often therefore i would not recommend trying it unless you felt you were confident of how good you know the game.
Dragec wrote:
They could be waiting for something like this(so play it out): www.chess.com/echess/game.html?id=43000682
haha
11. They are masochists, and want to prolong the pain of losing as long as possible.
El_Senior wrote:
RevLarry wrote:
If I really believe a person is being malicious I have been known to refuse to CM him. I will queen my pawn, underpromote the rest of my pawns, and put them all back on their original squares.
Then he will ask "why don't you finish the game?" I will and did say to him can you check mate me with a King? "no" "Will then why don't you resign?" and he did.
With all that meat on the board you have to be careful to avoid a stalemate...can you post the game?
No, it was a parlor game.
I like this consolidated table from artfizz:
http://www.chess.com/article/view/attitudes-towards-resigning
RevLarry wrote:
El_Senior wrote:
RevLarry wrote:
If I really believe a person is being malicious I have been known to refuse to CM him. I will queen my pawn, underpromote the rest of my pawns, and put them all back on their original squares.
Then he will ask "why don't you finish the game?" I will and did say to him can you check mate me with a King? "no" "Will then why don't you resign?" and he did.
With all that meat on the board you have to be careful to avoid a stalemate...can you post the game?
No, it was a parlor game.
El Senior I will try to set it up for you based on memory.
It has happen in master OTB games. In Steinitz vs. Von Bardeleben, Hastings 1895, Von Bardeleben left the tournament hall in a lost position. Steinitz had to wait for Von Bardeleden's clock to run out. Von Bardeleden was not mad at Steinitz, but was protesting the playing conditions.
RevLarry wrote:
RevLarry wrote:
El_Senior wrote:
RevLarry wrote:
If I really believe a person is being malicious I have been known to refuse to CM him. I will queen my pawn, underpromote the rest of my pawns, and put them all back on their original squares.
Then he will ask "why don't you finish the game?" I will and did say to him can you check mate me with a King? "no" "Will then why don't you resign?" and he did.
With all that meat on the board you have to be careful to avoid a stalemate...can you post the game?
No, it was a parlor game.
El Senior I will try to set it up for you based on memory.
El Senior..Ive tryed to copy and paste the set up position but I can't figure out how, then to get all the moves over to this thread is another problem. Im still new to the site.
I think especially players with a ratio under 1600 can make a lot of mistakes, so that the opponent can win, even if he/she has the not the same material. In my games against players with this ratio (most of my games) i always play till the end, because i often changed the game from a losing position to stalemate.
I have had it in a few of my bullet games where the resign button is actually non-responsive, so I just have to tell my opponent that i realize i am lost but am physically not able to resign.
I think another angle on this thread is, when a player continues those king moves its not that he plays it out that is irritating but the length of time between moves. In correspondence chess that will leave his game on your monitor a very long time. Every time you move down your list of players you have to take special notice of him and resist the possibility of pushing the wrong button making a mistake.
The temptation of a good old fashioned #*# wippin may be in order, but that would violate chess ethics.
If you are playing online with min. 1 move in 24 hours, then I believe the player in a no win or draw position should resign particularly if his or her opponent has made no obvious weak moves thus far. You should however never suggest to your opponent that they should call it a day - that would be rude. The only exceptions might possibly be if your opponent hails from Turkey, Greece, Cyprus, China, Japan, North Korea, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, or is an investment banker.
Yours sincerely
ekorbdal (general secretary for, The Society for World Tolerence)
Its a paradox. So any answer will suffice. When im in a paradox I only give three answers. 1. it is. 2. it is not. 3. non of the above. Learn to psychologically deal with all three answers and you will never need to ask another question again. (grin)