Why resign because you lost a piece?

Why do resign when you lost a Queen, instead of playing the game?

This isn’t fun for anyone. It’s something like that: The player lost 3 minutes to capture the Queen, there are 7 minutes left, the “capturer of the Queen” is a beginner. But the other player in fear of losing, because he is a 1270 rated, resigned. The other player was a little bit angry, and very sad.

It’s a history from my life.

For me. it depends on the situation.

Against a player with similar rating, I would frown upon the player if he drags out a position while down a queen with no counterplay or compensation (in terms of piece count or time remaining). Similarly, I would not bother continuing on in a queen down position against him where I would eventually get rolled over in a slow manner.

This is because the probability of a turnover of the tragedy is too low. Even if it can happen in say 1 out of 10 games, using your "7 minutes left" as an example, I could have saved an hour of game play for many more games or for other errands.

Against a player 800 rating points below mine, I would probably not resign, since I have a rating to protect and I would attempt to prevent him from scoring a major upset.

Thanks for answering 

One very good reason  to resign when you lose a piece is that it will free up time to make you a much  better player.

It's actually the opposite: If you are in an overwhelmingly lost position, it's not considered very proper to continue playing, and it's more sportsmanlike to admit that you have no chance of winning anymore, and to gracefully resign. Continuing to play just feels opportunistic (as if you were trying to see if your opponent will perhaps make a silly mistake, or run out of time) and a waste of time.

That being said, not all situations where you lose your queen (while your opponent doesn't lose it in exchange) should be considered an automatic loss. There are many situations where you are actually getting enough compensation that it may still be considered feasible to draw or even win. The most archetypal and quintessential example is if you trade your queen for both of your opponent's rooks (which in high level play is actually considered to give you a slight advantage). Moreso if you trade your queen for an opponent's rook and two minor pieces (which in points evaluation is even better).

Trading your queen for an opponent's rook and one minor piece is technically speaking disadvantageous, but there may still be some chances, so it shouldn't always be considered an automatic loss. Especially if you also can add an opponent's pawn or two to the trade.

I have won at least one game here at chess.com where due to a mistake I was forced to make such an unequal trade of my queen for a couple of my opponent's lesser pieces and pawns. So one shouldn't always be so eager to resign in such situations, no matter how instinctive it feels.

Because my opponent is not 400

In Arena events it is worth moving on and having another game as losses do not count.

ya ummmm ibarley joined this game today... sooo

It is depended on the rating of your opponent and the time control. Such as, If i play aganist a 2200 rated player and lose the queen I resign cause i know that out of 10 times i will win one from mouseslip. So that my opinion

And to still add to what I wrote above, also note that not all positions that at first glance may seem like lost in the eyes of a beginner (and even a not-so-beginner) are actually lost, but can be drawn with proper play. Many a beginner will immediately resign a king vs king+pawn endgame because they think they don't have a chance. Yet, surprisingly many such positions, even ones that look at first like easy wins, are actually draws if the lone king plays properly. (King+pawn vs king is one of the most quintessential yet, ironically, one of the most difficult endgames for beginners and even medium-strength players.)

It's even worse when people resign after they blunder but before their piece is actually taken. Clearly, if you're bad enough to lose a piece, and your opponent is the same rating you are, they are also probably bad enough to not see the tactic and take it.

Yeah, many, many times someone has resigned on my turn, before I could even see why. I had to close the ending dialog in order to see why they resigned.

While I don't think it's a hard rule, I still think it's somewhat proper to only resign on your own turn. In fact, the longer you wait on your opponent's turn to resign, the more disrespectful it seems. Just wait for your opponent to make the correct move, and then resign, as if to say "yup, you saw it, I resign."

Besides, sometimes your opponent doesn't see your blunder and you might survive. Just wait and see.

Some people are just plain dumb

While if you lose example: a Queen you can still win the game.

True

Losing a queen can definitely be worth resignation. Why waste your time with an inevitable conclusion. Now, those who lose an exchange or minor piece in the beginning and resign.... That seems premature. But 1-0 is 1-0 so I'm not complaining