CHESS ETIQUETTE: Playing On In Ridiculous Positions, etc,

Ah.  My mistake.  Misunderstood your post.

not playing until # is denial 4 ego protection; a disease.

feel the # so u actually learn something. 

it's like saying, "b b b Daddy I don't need paddling." 

resigning is regression repression sublimation displacement projection and denial.

And that's just the Freudian aspects!

gg, Jung gun.

If you are above 1300, it is not possible to get stalemate draw in KQ vs K. Only the weakest of the weak would be able to get a stalemate from an endgame so easy to win. 

Yeah, I'd be pretty depressed to drop one of those!

@ 30 seconds

Its BLITZ, you peacock! Anything can happen in blitz or bullet!

But in a normal classical game, 0% chance of anyone above 1300 to stalemate such a simple endgame. 

I know it's blitz, and OTB games can get low on time too.

I saw a 1500 adult stalemate a kid when they both had plenty of time, but no one was taking a video of it.

There are a few things to take into account before resigning such as your opponent's rating, mood, and time on the clock. I've saved points this way.

Of course only little kids and beginners play all the way to checkmate, but that's normal.

You should never resign to be polite.

folks who resign act superior as if they saw the combo deeper; they're sick.

sickos!!

TO BE POLITE???? You got to be kidding me. In a classical game, not resigning in a lost position is madness. You waste both your own time and your opponent's time.

You don't understand how frustrated the winning player is, when he looks at some sore loser that wouldn't resign and hope that he could be stalemated.

The winning player could be having lunch or a snack, or maybe talking to his FRIENDS, or PREPARING FOR NEXT ROUND, but then he have to waste time on an idiot who cannot accept defeats!!!!! C'mon, you know better than this!! You're not exactly a weak beginner either, you're 2000. 

THE ONLY TIME YOU DONKEYS SHOULDN'T RESIGN IS IN BLITZ. 

It depends on the situation. Sometimes it's correct to resign, sometimes it isn't.

And by the way, one 2000 opponent of mine, OTB in a classical game, became very upset (your all caps is reminiscent) when I didn't immediately resign in a losing position. So of course I didn't resign right away because maybe his emotions will effect his play.

Which is exactly what happened, and by the end of the game he had to fight to get a draw.

Of course almost all my losses are by resignation, but there are multiple things to consider.

I think Deaf Blue is right on almost all counts. It's surprising how often someone will become agitated when the opponent doesn't resign. The game was meant to be played until checkmate, yet playing the game the way it was intended for some reason irritates some people. Players who let their emotions get the best of them will be negatively affected by not resigning, which leads to winning or drawing options for the side that is losing.

Also, even a normal game can become a very fast paced game at the very end, where simple mistakes can happen. If someone insists that it's impossible for anyone over 1300 to lose a K vs KQ endgame, maybe that person hasn't reached 1300 yet. In that video, maybe the player that lost was also below 1300.

People that get so excited and disgruntled over not resigning might have to accept that they are not as good as they think they  are. Most chess players are not grandmasters. Most are not even masters. Most chess players, like me, are just not that good so it doesn't make sense to prematurely resign.

Donkeys in chess?  Damn poker players!