Scottrf wrote:
Not extra letters. It's our f*#@&%g language!
I know how do you manage to mess that up? :)
Bloody has six letters and doesn't start with an f. :)
Folks that never resign...
Sort:
manuelpdl wrote:
...when they have one king and a pawn against a king, a bishop, two rocks, a queen and three pawns...and they let the time drag just because they are sore losers.
I think it should be ok to cuss these guys when they do this! I've been kicked out for telling someone that was a shitty thing to do - and it was.
Well.... if you are ahead that much in the game, and cannot beat your opponent in a couple of moves......
Dec 12, 2014
0
#104
Is it considered bad etiquette to play for a stalemate? I have mixed feelings about it. On the one hand, it kind of sucks that you can be up tons of pieces and still end up in a stalemate. On the other hand, it seems to add another level of interest and strategy to the game, in my opinion. In any case, I mostly just play against my phone app, and it's happened to me many times where I'm way up on material and then I can't figure out how to finish it off.
The OP had rocks! 
Dec 12, 2014
0
#106
To cut a long story short....I much prefer a dignified exit from a game once I know I have lost, the added advantage to that is that I don't waste my valuable time, and my opponents time for that matter. I find it very sad when an opponent keeps playing on and on because they just don't have the good judgement to quit.
Sometimes, I don't give up when I am losing because I want to see the art of there idea come to fruition, specially when its a nice finishing combo. When I have a nice line that leads to mate and my opponent lets me play it.. I am happy :) Sometimes I don't give up just out of momentum. Other reasons might include, time is a tactic, and sometimes there is more play left.. its not that cut and dry. If stalemate is available.. why would you resign? Even if the opponent is ahead in material. Mostly I do resign down material but there are a few special occasions where I will play on.. even if I have no winning chances. It is good practice, specially if you put up a strong fight a knight down. Next game, if you have all of your pieces you might be able to secure a win.
There is an idea that a lot of people seem to hold near and dear, why they might not understand why I would play on in a certain position. Does being up an exchange really mean you are winning all the time?
Dec 12, 2014
0
#108
If one doesn't take the opportunities to practice end games, then how can one expect to improve in that aspect of the game?
My sentiments exactly Geoffrey, thank you. My rating is falling but I'm learning alot from the end games.
I don't mind people wanting to play a game out to its logical conclusion, even from a clearly lost position, but the weird thing is when people prefer to abandon the game and time out rather than resign or play it out. I recently won two games against the same opponent in 3 days per move online games. One game he was facing a forced mate in one, and waited until only 3 hours left on his clock to resign (having otherwise played much more rapidly), and in the other he just preferred to time out rather than resign in a clearly lost position. Not that it matters - it costs me no effort to allow my opponent to time himself out in an online game - but it's just weird.
I see chess as an enjoyable game, nobody being good or bad? Many will disagree i'm sure but hey ho :)
GeoffreyBurrows wrote:
If one doesn't take the opportunities to practice end games, then how can one expect to improve in that aspect of the game?
What this man said, couldn't agree more! 
Ooohh! Steady boys it's only a game! 
What you play chess with a track suit on do you?
A mate of mine went up to watch the Highland games once...
In toss the caber he said the announcer shouted over the tannoy system..
.."and here comes Hamish Mc'Fadden.. He truly is the worlds greatest tosser"! LOL
We are taught to find the best move and make plans on idea that our opponents will make the best possible move buts this is not reality, Humans are not chess computers. Even the worlds best players do blunders like we saw on championship games. It's ridiculous to say you have to resign when it looks hopeless for good manners. When it looks bad you should just keep fighting on.
I actually can't recall any championship game that didn't end in resignation. Hell, I don't even recall any blunders, only those that were seen by computers at who knows what depth, and an average person wouldn't see it. We're clearly talking about being up pieces without any compensation in an endgame, dragging the clock, hoping for a stalemate, and that's something you never see in a serious game.
Except for Korchnoi, maybe, but he is known to be an a..hole when it comes to manners.
This years championship games Carlsen vs Anand game 3, Carlsen got in trouble early on against Anands well prepared line, Carlsen resinged at 20 seconds on the clock, that can be easily counted as fighting right until the end in grim circumstances. In game 6 move 26 Carlsen made blunder that in your opinion should've ended the game right away in resignation, the commentators saw the blunder and without using computer, Anand didn't. He too blundered and Carlsen went on and won the game