Good players know when to resign, and they do . Most people who play on in clearly lost positions are hacks or jerks and sometimes both .
Lately not resigning has spread like a disease. Players acting like it is tactic to win games. Like the Flu season we will have to get our Anti-Resign shots around here. Some players even start playing with their cats. They know now to tilt the king. Pieces may smell ......
I have a new puzzle which addresses a point we are now discussing. Hope some of you will try it. ..
If you try it and do not understand the solution--just ask...
I haven't gone through the whole post yet, but I'd like to comment. This is sort of funny to me, because depending on the person, it is actually offensive to resign before the game is finished with #. That is, "play it out!" I used to resign, but then I read posts from multiple people saying resigning before # is uncouth....Whats the deal, then? lol. I think people who play chess are pssd-off in general and will find a reason to complain no matter what the issue is. I say this because I have begun to see pettiness in OTB matches. Don't get me wrong...this is a result of the highly competitive nature of the game and of people just wanting to save face. It seems almost anything can be a reason to take offence to. Tables turned, most people (I think) find satisfaction in actually sacking the opponents King rather than have them run away in defeat. Additionally, I think for many people, playing until the very end gives them a chance to potentially learn something new...There was a post on here a few days ago about a game "clearly lost". The guy was going to resign, but his opponent made the most epic of blunders. The guy actually came back to win.....
natural, try my new puzzle for another aspect of all of this...
If you always play a game out in a hopeless position sometimes you will gain a win. your opponent could horribly blunder or die or be incapacitated or disconnected. But is it worth it?
natural, try my new puzzle for another aspect of all of this...
If you always play a game out in a hopeless position sometimes you will gain a win. your opponent could horribly blunder or die or be incapacitated or disconnected. But is it worth it?
lol. True. I was talking about games not so hopeless. Where is you puzzle?
Bic guy
My first puzzle the alternate solution is to promote to a knight but it actually happens fairly often in real games that it is needed to promote to a knight so I used bishop. In the past few months I have had two games where it was necessary to promote to a knight.
But I refer to my most recent puzzle a few posts ago--that puzzle is quite different from the puzzle at the very start of this thread...
A lot of people seem to be misunderstanding what is meant by 'a hopeless game'. Nobody is suggesting people should resign if they have a couple of rooks and a few pawns left simply because the opponent is up a queen or something. If you feel there is enough play in it to try and get a draw or even a victory then by all means play on. In fact, I actually think you should play on. There is something to be learned from such an endgame.
The example I gave earlier in this thread is what I would take to mean as 'hopeless' (and I think what most people on the side of resigning a hopeless position take it to mean as well). If you have 2 pawns and a king left against a king, bishop, queen, knight and 3 pawns and the only piece it is ever going to be possible for you to move is the king, then resigning is polite in a 14 day per move tournament. There is absolutely nothing to learn from this position and by dragging it out you are basically saying either you are purposely trying to be an annoyance or you think I am stupid enough to hand you a stalemate.
In that puzzle your opponents move 2... Rf7 allowing the knight to pinned gave no chance to avoid losing as the Rook is paralyzed. So to even hope to get out would result in lost of Rook or loss of exchange when a piece is pinned.
The Knight at Outpost f5 is sign things may be coming to an end in the game with only the Queen able to remove it from that position.
Look like your opponent just wanted to end it honorably. The other route would involve the chance of losing his/her Queen to drag out the game with same result, you winning the game.
A lot of people seem to be misunderstanding what is meant by 'a hopeless game'.
They know what is meant by a hopeless game. Acting 
When the option to abuse the vacation function they move onto not resigning to try to frustrate players. They are just campaigning to get new players to not resign to keep this new movement alive as it has really recently started a couple months ago.
Other than frustration they hope to win.... by Time Out by not resigning.
In a game Queen vs 2 Rooks, games with a difference in material like Bishop vs Knight, Rook vs Knight, Bishop vs Roook, 2 Bishops vs 2 Knights, Rook vs Bishop and/or Knight by all means play it out. Yes by theory one side is favored to win. But it still requires some skill but when the situation arrives where it is clearly mate in 4 .....Resign!
Do you see the alternate solution for the 7th move?
Promote e8 to Q is mate also?
royalbishop got the lastest problem partially right. It was a situation where my opponent and I had played a 2 game match which was published in a chess magazine once a month--every 5 moves with full annotations for both sides.
My opponent, rather than resigning, did something unique, something I had not seen before...
He gave me the "if" moves so the game would end quickly in the fairly rare and somewhat beautiful Epaulette Mate! This was a very friendly tribute to my play in the one game and his friendship. Incidently, I lost the 2nd game of the 2 game exhibition match.
My opponent knew how to resign or end the game in style!
A lot of people seem to be misunderstanding what is meant by 'a hopeless game'.
They know what is meant by a hopeless game. Acting
When the option to abuse the vacation function they move onto not resigning to try to frustrate players. They are just campaigning to get new players to not resign to keep this new movement alive as it has really recently started a couple months ago.
Other than frustration they hope to win.... by Time Out by not resigning.
In a game Queen vs 2 Rooks, games with a difference in material like Bishop vs Knight, Rook vs Knight, Bishop vs Roook, 2 Bishops vs 2 Knights, Rook vs Bishop and/or Knight by all means play it out. Yes by theory one side is favored to win. But it still requires some skill but when the situation arrives where it is clearly mate in 4 .....Resign!
this is what basic members complain about ALL THE TIME. There are many other reasons people use vacation time. Like, a real vacation somewhere, or a family emergency, or just too many games going. If you want just put a conditional string like I do, and find something else to do. Or, just join non vacation tournaments...don't assume that they're just rude. I personally have only 10 days of vacation left, so I'm online frequently and never join non-vacation tournaments. I used up a lot of vacation time because I had tons of work to do...
Regarding vacation time. I once played a year long internet game against a powerful team. Before the game started they laid out the rules for vacation time allowed. During the game they were always in time trouble because I played so fast. There was also a tournament director for that game.
As it turned out the TD told the team they were breaking the rules by taking too much vacation time and they might forfeit the game. [I did not ask for a forfeit]
Guess what was the reply of the team?
Btw, decent game against Daniel Rensch. You did quite well.
Hey, regardless it was well played. He is solid. Chassfa1 did well to win but it was more of a blunder on Daniel's part than a win for him. Can't take it away from him though, that is the nature of a simul.
The team had played another master with the same opening and had won very quickly. This time they were fighting to try and draw. When the TD told them they were over stepping the limits for vacation they told the TD that this match was their own idea in the first place and that they made the rules in the first place and they can change the rules if they wish!
royal, you indicated that vote chess teams which refuse to resign in lost positions get double the points taken off their rank for losing? I have not heard of that before? Is it still in effect? How does it work? curious..