| From | Message |
mrzor
10/04/2002
09:32:41 |
 Subject: Resign please!
Message:
I'm relatively new here, and maybe this subject has been discussed before, but anyway...
Is it just my impression, or do people here strech their games to the absolute limit? I've seen cases where players keep playing on in an ending with a rook, a couple of pieces or even a queen down.
In OTB chess such behaviour is "accepted" for two-three moves (so the victim gets a chance accept his defeat) but playing an ending with a rook down in correspondence chess, I mean come on.
I myself tend to resign quite quickly (perhaps too quickly), but so far only few of my opponents here have done so.
Does anyone out there share my frustration?
Zor
|
swindel
10/04/2002
09:57:52 | resign
Message:
I think MrZor is simply afraid to lose a won game. Maybe he should study the endgames. I have studied endgames, and i know how to make mate with two bishops. Maybe MrZor is afraid of mate with two bishops.
All of you: don't give up until your last breath.
|
nmdo
10/04/2002
10:03:10 |
Message:
I have to agree with mrzor. I'm playing a guy who is down 2 minor pieces and some pawns. He has no chance of winning unless I screw up bad, but he still plays.
|
jeffz_2002
10/04/2002
10:12:37 | I agree, mrzor
Message:
OTB, it's ok to keep playing for a few moves, but in correspondence, you're prolonging the inevitable.
swindel, I hear you too, but I think that mrzor was referring to cases where it's obvious that a victory is assured.
I played someone who had some pawns and a rook left, and I had 2 rooks, bishop, knight, queen, and 5 pawns left, but my opponent still wouldn't resign. The game just dragged on and on. On the other hand, being a new player, it's sometimes still instructive to continue playing to get a feel for how to end things quickly.
|
peppe_l
10/04/2002
10:29:50 | There are different cases
Message:
For example some people believe its good manners not to resign and allow opponent to mate. Yes its a wrong impression, but the meaning is good - to show good manners. I have seen cases where someone plays till mate, but clearly wants to wrap up the game quickly so that opponent gets his deserved wil ASAP. The opposite cases are those where a player KNOWS its good manners to resign in lost position, but delays the game DELIBERATELY, for example by using full * days for obvious moves in lost position, or even postponing the game. I dont know why some folks do it, but it certainly isnt correct IMO.
|
peppe_l
10/04/2002
10:32:17 | Sorry, lots of spelling errors
Message:
...Again...
|
poisonedpawn78
10/04/2002
10:53:07 | here is my view ...
Message:
do not resign if there is still plenty of play left , oportunities can arrise from mistakes or good positioning to even the game back up .
if you lose your queen for free .. just resign .
when its obvious that your king and his mighty pawns cant defend against the rook and bishop and knight and ..... resign ..
if mate is obvious and its clear your oponent sees it and is doing the correct moves for it ... just resign
perfect example
board #290010
mate in 2 or 3 is quite obvious here . why play ?
|
absolutegenius
10/04/2002
11:07:33 | i still play endgames
Message:
play for the stalemate-i played a 1800 rated player on kasparovchess, and he stalemated me with his queen and rook. you are against a singe king, and you have a rook and a pawn, do not promote the pawn to a queen-2 rook endings have less chance of a stale mate, although they may take longer.
|
legion
10/04/2002
12:03:49 | I tend to resign...
Message:
...pretty quickly once I'm down in material.
It used to bug me when others didn't do the same but not anymore. I figure if the games as good as won, it doesn't really matter how long they want to drag it out.
|
parrvert
10/04/2002
15:40:02 | resigning
Message:
While I agree players should not take the maximum time for each move just to delay defeat, I don't see anything wrong with playing on when it seems you will lose. Particularly against lower rated players a draw or even a win can be salvaged from a poor position, besides if you are in such a good position you will finish them off fairly quickly.
|
chuckventimiglia
10/04/2002
16:12:27 | I totally agree....
Message:
with mrzor. I am relatively new to GK but not to chess. It is rude and unsportsmanlike to keep playing an obviously lost game. People are waiting and hoping that you totally blunder by losing two pieces so they can get a Draw. This is not chess.
I have played chess for 45 or so years and if I had counted the times I was checkmated it would be maybe a dozen times. Why? Because, if I see my game is lost I simply resign. That is the honorable way to play chess. Just my opinion. Chuck
|
lexherman
10/05/2002
00:50:41 | I agree
Message:
I agree with that. even worse: keep dragging on a lost game...and then just one move before checkmate resign......
|
absolutegenius
10/05/2002
01:14:20 | i forgot to say in my last post
Message:
that i like to finish games when i am winning! it gives you practice, and sometimes it can be a challenge.
|
gooftrooper
10/05/2002
02:57:48 | jeffz_2002
Message:
if you are up that much on material and the game dragged on for ages then your pretty useless if you couldnt finish him off quickly.
|
peppe_l
10/05/2002
04:27:34 | Absolutegenius
Message:
"play for the stalemate-i played a 1800 rated player on kasparovchess, and he stalemated me with his queen and rook. you are against a singe king, and you have a rook and a pawn, do not promote the pawn to a queen-2 rook endings have less chance of a stale mate, although they may take longer."
...And you arent talking about blitz game here? :)
In fast games such things happen, last time I saw it was at club in a game between two masters. But another question is even if one can say 1 lost game out of 100 via stalemate, is it really worth the effort?
|
hugothebest2001
10/05/2002
05:06:44 | resigning in a losing game!
Message:
I would resign when i have a position that i can't winn(or draw) anymore.
But i find it a bad behavior when you ask for a draw when you are losing the game.
I have played someone on gameknot that asked me a several times for a draw. And that in a position that was for that person totaly lost
That is what i called a bad behavior.
In a game face to face it's possible that you winn a lost position. But not here at gameknot.
This is a great site because you can play the best moves, because you have a lot of time.
I play only openings that i play in a normal game at my chessclub!
So i will be a good player that is hard to winn from
Greetings
|
drumbo
10/05/2002
09:28:27 | What do you think?
Message:
board #354157
|
hugothebest2001
10/05/2002
09:51:42 | i think resign!
Message:
Because white can't win or draw this game anymore.
Maybey he wants to learn of you!
What is the shortest way to mate him!
Goodluck with that game
|
neogeek
10/05/2002
11:10:55 | Every Situation is Different
Message:
WTF? This is correspondence chess. How much of your time does it take to move in a match in which you are spanking your opponent? Suck it up.
I think most people will resign once THEY realize that the match is a wash, but that is their decision, not yours.
If your oppenent goes a piece down because of bad play on their part, why can't you lose a piece due to a loss of concentration? Don't give up until you realize your position is lost, if you think you can draw, play till you think you can't.
I believe Hugo says it more succinctly.
|
victord
10/05/2002
12:08:30 | agree
Message:
I agree with most I've read here, I'll just add that as you move up in rateing you will find players who realize when they are lost in a game with nothing to learn .. only pain.. and will resign when you 'prove' you know what you're doing. At least that's the way i do it. I'm 1500 ..I know when I'm in a lost endgame most times. If I'm in with a player of equal or higher rate who has me 'hooked' in the endgame it's..."Good game." or "thanks for the game. or "rematch?".. why waste time and energy.
If I'm in with an 'unknown" .. say a new player still 1200 ...he's going to have to show me he knows what he's doing in the end...some things are obvious, others must be proven.
|
atrifix
10/05/2002
17:36:56 | Resigning
Message:
There exists a point in a losing game, where, given the strength of your opponent, the amount of material on the board, the complications of the position, etc., you realize that you no longer have any chance of winning or drawing. At this point you can resign, as you have nothing to gain from playing on, whereas by resigning you can at least conserve some energy. It's probably not unacceptable to play on; any self-respecting player should be able to convert such an advantage into a win easily. Resigning is a purely subjective decision.
For example, I once dropped a rook in an important tournament game on about the 10th move. I could have resigned then, but I chose to play on, and eventually somehow won the game (and, subsequently, the tournament). In other cases, I've resigned when I'm just a pawn down. At any rate, a player should never feel somehow 'cheated' because their opponent does not resign. Resigning is not mandatory.
The real problems arise mainly in correspondence chess. For example, in tournaments, a player can play on an obviously losing position and hold the rest of the tournament from continuing for a month. In a correspondence position where a player is down a queen or is directly losing a KR vs K endgame or something similar, the chance of an opponent somehow allowing a draw are close to 0. Even in blitz, most players will win these types of situations; in correspondence chess, the chances of a draw are significantly decreased. In this case, IMHO, a player should just resign.
|
drumbo
10/06/2002
18:40:19 | Can he buy a stalemate?
Message:
It lingers on.
board #354157
|
7500
10/06/2002
23:43:00 | Resign please !
Message:
I think that Swindel wouldn't be called Swindel if he didn't win all his games by swindling in lost positions...
|
alar
10/07/2002
05:38:18 | Another idea
Message:
Now, much people learn to play chess in computers. Computers don't teach good maners.
When we learn at a chess club, they teach us how to play and when to resign. (For in case, this day I was sick :-D )
My worse experience: I played a game here at 14 days/move. I had an unestopable checkmate in two.
My opponent waste the 14 days and made a move. When I reply, he asked for a vacation posponement. Then, went and wasted the other 14 days, moved and I checkmated him.
In blitz when my opponent don't resign I try to get as queens as I can, avoiding the stalemate by putting the queens in a corner. Someones resign when I get my third or fourth queen, but others continue to the end.
|
jeffz_2002
10/07/2002
06:45:19 | gooftrooper
Message:
Yes, I suck at this game, I freely admit that. I'm working on fixing that. Also, I admit that in this game that dragged on, I tried to be a bit too clever more than once. Bad me. However, I still believe that sometimes it is more gracious to concede defeat.
But hey, I'm not even rated 1000, so I think I'll just go back to work on learning how my pawns move. (sideways?)
|
peppe_l
10/07/2002
06:52:03 | Alar
Message:
I agree. Its great there are clubs where people can learn good manners, whereas internet defitenitely is a bad enviroment for players who dont know how one is expected to behave when playing chess. One very bad example is www.pogo.com, when I played there I spend most of my time in playing positions like Q+R+K vs K etc...Once I opened a discussion about resignation, and answers I got were "quitters never win" (very popular saying at Pogo) or "once I got stalemate against *** (rating) player"
This was one reason why I left Pogo (others were unrealistic rating system and ridiculous titles that made beginners believe they were experts etc)...but soon I realized all internet chess sites have their faults - being anonymous really gives all kinds of idiots a chance to act badly, be it disconnecting in lost positions, using a prog, letting the time run out instead of resigning in slow games, mocking people, or...thousands of other ways to make the site less comfortable place to play for everyone.
When I went to a club first time, I though THIS is the place where I want to play chess. Whenever I hear opinions like "why go to a club when you can play in internet at your home?" etc...I can only say it is worth effort, and I really dont get it why so many people dont even try it once. I mean what is there to lose?
|
pheck
10/07/2002
08:26:33 | ...
Message:
I tend not to resign, i saw it as cheating the opponent out of the win, in a way, for someone to work so hard at breaking me down, for me to go 'ah, sod it" and walk away seems rude to me.
|
getoutofhere
10/07/2002
17:07:48 | when to resign
Message:
My policy is to resign when I clearly see an
unavoidable path to checkmate. I was a little sad
to get an email about board #348448 where I thought I
was doing a good job fighting after an early error
saying that I was being antisocial by prolonging a
game I had severely lost, and playing too slowly (I
had used less than 3 days of a 14 day time control).
I can see that it may be boring to have to play out
a winning position, but I don't feel I should have to
resign in a game just because it looks like I will
probably lose.
|
poisonedpawn78
10/07/2002
18:26:25 | getoutofhere ...
Message:
i just looked at your game .. and the way i see it .. its still possible for black to win / get a draw ... so dont listen to him and play on with lasker'esque vigor ... that is clearly not a position black should be resigning in .. atleast not yet =)
|
getoutofhere
10/07/2002
20:13:35 | thanks
Message:
thanks for the encouragement pp78
|
tovmauzer
10/07/2002
21:47:23 | From my opinion...
Message:
it is much worse and more rude to ask opponent to resign than to not resign in time. Getoutofthere, I would not even bother myself to answer to such e-mail. If you see chances, play on!
|
atrifix
10/07/2002
21:54:53 | I agree with tovmauzer
Message:
It is considered extremely rude to ask the opponent to resign.
|
atrifix
10/07/2002
21:54:53 | I agree with tovmauzer
Message:
It is considered extremely rude to ask the opponent to resign.
|
dozer
10/08/2002
00:29:08 | I agree with tovmauzer too..
Message:
I use to play some moves in a lost position if checkmate is not evident in near future, because I have lost some won positions (even when Rook up)!! I resign when there is obviously no plan that could compensate my losses. That may yield nasty surprises! :)
Also if I make an opening mistake I might prolong to move 18 or so to resign... It shouldn't be so hard to accept. I never play more slowly when position is lost than when it's won.
Regards,
Teemu
|
p8ntballjunky1
10/08/2002
09:34:41 |
Message:
whats wrong with stauling, i love doing it haaaaaahahaha
|
drumbo
10/08/2002
15:08:47 | Stalling the inevitable seems rude . . .
Message:
I posted this board board #354157 here three days ago when my opponent had only a King to my three pawns. He's been in that position since move 48. It seemed that a resignation would have been prudent at that time, and now that we are at move 60, I'm sure that he's just stalling.
His five moves in the last three days has only seen his position become more dire, yet, the previous weekend, he managed to make more than twice as many moves, when he still had a fighting chance and perhaps should have taken time to study the board. Had he taken his time in the middle game he would likely not be in this regrettable end-game position.
Because he doesn't hide his online status, I can see when he's at gameknot and fails to visit our tournament game and make a move - he's stalling imho; taking lots of time now that his moves are severely limited, and I just don't understand why he didn't take as much time for his earlier moves.
The rules say that he has two days to move his King each time, but, it's pointless, and while I won't be so rude as to ask him to resign, I can always hope that he'll make his way into this forum with all that time he has on his hands.
What drives me absolutely nuts about this situation, is that I resigned to this opponent in our first tournament game: board #354160 seven days ago when my position wasn't nearly as critical as his is now - I see no point in moving pieces after the game's been decided.
|
mrzor
10/09/2002
00:42:07 | I'll tell you one thing...
Message:
Stalling is something only patzers do, and for a very simple reason:
Any decent player can't bear the sight of a position where he's a clear (i.e. no compensation) piece or rook down: It just disgusts him. I know it disgusts me, and I'm sure it disgusts a lot of other guys too.
Zor
|
zdrak
10/09/2002
01:13:07 |
Message:
Well said, MrZor!
|
smokinghead
10/09/2002
01:43:12 | they need it
Message:
in a casino you will see gamblers, laughing when they loose and get angry when they wins. Maybe some players here have the same problem - they really like the feeling to loose the game and don't want to stop this feeling by a simple resign.
1. try message like this: please don't resign - I like the feeling of many winning positions in my "active games" and it makes me proud everybody can see them.
2. For the players without any honor there is a good place in the ignore lists.
|
alar
10/09/2002
03:20:22 | drumbo
Message:
Don't get angry. Get three queens, then spend 15 moves more checkmating him. Meanwhile tearfully apologize for your poor performance. :-DDDD
|
mrzor
10/09/2002
03:56:57 | Or how about this:
Message:
I suggest we open a special thread, uniquely and solely devoted to show links that expose those boards where a player has been dragging on in an utterly, ridiculously lost position, for everyone to see...
Zor
|
theinvisibleman
10/09/2002
04:07:24 |
Message:
I think seasoned players should resign by way of courtesy, but beginners should be allowed to play the game out. How else will they ever get to experience and understand endgame patterns and the subtleties of mate? Tolerance and understanding should be a forethought before any pawn gets pushed.
|
zdrak
10/09/2002
04:10:12 |
Message:
"I suggest we open a special thread, ..."
I think that would be pushing it too far. I personally would not like a thread dedicated to "kicking a man when he's down". Yes, those people have no self respect, but two wrongs don't make a right.
|
drumbo
10/09/2002
05:38:31 | 50 move rule . . .
Message:
I read on another topic about the 50 move rule here at Game Knot. If it was stated correctly, 50 moves without a capture or a move of a pawn would implement an automatic draw. If this is correct, perhaps it would be worthwhile to move the King around the board indefinitely if you feel your opponent cannot mplement a checkmate.
However, with a single King and a three pawn disadvantage it's unlikely that the 50 move rule could come into effect imho. With a Queen and a Rook against a single King, it seems unlikey that the underdog could survive 50 moves without mate. Just in case, perhaps I should hold the third pawn in reserve? lol!
|
cheetah
10/09/2002
05:51:16 |
Message:
I think it depends on the level of the players involved.
High level players know endgame techniques but for instance I have a lot to learn.
So even when I'm in a great advantage I find it usefull to be able to experiment and learn.
When it's otherwise it depends. If my oponent is a high level player I resign when It's not fun any more, just forced moves, one after the other...
|
drumbo
10/09/2002
17:17:25 | It's not over til it's over . . .
Message:
Apparently someone tipped my opponent. A flury of activity saw us each make three moves today! With no stalling, I see checkmate in five moves.
|
sonofcaissa
10/10/2002
00:26:24 | Have just been reading
Message:
all the posts above and I thought I'd throw in my two pennies worth: while I wholeheartedly agree that it really bad chess etiquette to ask an opponent to resign, I never have any objection to an opponent playing on in a losing position.
Like most of you here I play at a level where it is not only possible, but sometimes almost inevitable, that I will make a mistake at some point during the game. If I find myself on the losing side then I will usually play on until the result is very clearly lost for me. I never feel that it is worthwhile to resign early on (depending on the position on the board, of course!) if you are only a knight or a bishop down, because, if you manage to exchange everything else off, K+N/K+B v K is a draw anyway. Also never give up hope until you have to.
sonofcaissa
|
dozer
10/10/2002
00:42:33 |
Message:
That "special thread" would be voted for deletion quite quickly. Not everyone of those who play out one game, do so in every game they are losing. Most do so only in very few games. Of course there are those "stallers" but why to further humiliate them? Probably they won't even read the Forums.
Regards,
Dozer
|
suci_pres
10/10/2002
08:16:11 | As with all of life... it depends
Message:
When I clearly have a lost position, I search for the ability to force stalemate. Once I see that's not going to work, I resign immediately, especially against strong players. Now, I've been down a piece and some pawns (due to horrible blunders) against weaker players and just when I was about to resign, I kept on... and won or at minimum drawn.
Bottom line, however, don't be an @$$ if you know you have a lost game. What's the point? Or at least, ask your opponent if he/she minds continuing because you want to "see what you can do" even though you know it's lost. This courteous gesture goes a long way.
|
drbmom
10/11/2002
02:07:42 |
Message:
Message - Yes, those people have no self-respect...
It is interesting to me that people feel that way. It?s also funny, your comment made me laugh out loud zdrat. I am still learning the game, and in most cases I play through to the end. I have resigned in a handful of games, but if a player can beat me, I would like to see how they are going to do it. I have had players ask me to resign when they have had the upper hand. If they ask, and their rating is at least double mine, and if I can clearly see the loss, then I do. If I can't see it I ask them to tell me. If they can't tell me, I play it through. Whether I choose to resign or not has nothing to do with self-respect.
Since this is a site with players of all levels and many different chess theories, we are going to have to be tolerant of each other's preferences. If you run into a player who you think is stalling, don?t challenge them again. If you are in a game you think is dragging on, just use it to show of your winning skills and endurance.
|
gutschi
10/11/2002
08:03:10 | Well...
Message:
... i understand if people fight until the end... very brave... but why not resign the following games? It's just a waste of time
board #311036
board #382813
board #375418
|
chessjunkie
10/11/2002
08:48:16 | CJ's level headed opinion
Message:
If the winning player is that far ahead in material, then he won't mind waiting as many more moves as it takes to win. Chess requires *some* patience to play! Capturing your opponent's entire army doesn't constitute a checkmate, after all :P You are obligated to win the won game. Pointless or not, i've seen many of these "losing positions" force their way into a draw, or even win. Personally, I don't usually resign until the very next move is an obvious checkmate.
Above all, I believe it's *extraordinarily* rude to ask (or demand) someone who knows their plight to resign. It's insulting intelligence and all around in most sports considered bad sportsmanship.
Chess is a good sportsman's game!
|
honololou
10/11/2002
15:14:55 | chessjunkie…
Message:
for your comments…I award you a plus.
|
victord
10/24/2002
07:54:07 | triangle person
Message:
brought it back up for you.
|
refutor
10/24/2002
12:39:14 | to chessjunkie...
Message:
not me...if i have 2 rooks and a couple of pawns and the opponent has his king, i see nothing wrong with saying "there's no shame in resigning" or something like that. playing on at that point is rude
|
chessjunkie
10/24/2002
13:51:48 | refutor
Message:
There is a difference between saying "there's no shame in resigning" and "to ask (or demand) someone who knows their plight to resign."
:P I tried to phrase it to be fair!
If someone demanded you give them your kidney, I'd think it was at least rude :P
If someone asks nicely, it may be an exception too.
"Hey, you know, this game doesn't really matter that much, and we both have lots of games to concentrate on, so could you consider resigning?" "Yeah, I think I know how the endgame is going to go, I don't particularly need practice at finishing this" or "This is interesting, you'll win, but lets play it out anyways"
This is reasonable because it shows that the requesting person won't mind what answer he gets.
But the requests these rude people have given me in the past have been given in the format along the lines of: "Resign....Resign (repeatedly)." "damn it why don't you resign"
Regardless of pawn formation, they implicitly wanted me to give up because I was a few pawns down.
These are rude because the requesting person expects you to comply. It transfigures the request into a command, or demand, in a way.
|
refutor
10/24/2002
15:28:11 | sorry
Message:
i misunderstood :) i totally agree with you...believe it or not some people take offense to "there's no shame in resigning" ;)
|
chuckventimiglia
10/24/2002
19:54:33 | For me resigning a.....
Message:
lost game will at least save my self respect.
I give all my opponents the benefit of the doubt.
If they can gain material and positional
advantage over me then they will, no doubt,
checkmate me. I would much rather lose
a game by respectfully resigning then carrying
on a lost cause.
There are times when I am playing an
opponent, that has obviously lost but does not
resign, I will concentrate on denuding his
King before checkmating him. :-]
I know that this is a form of disrespect
but no more so than his disrespect to me.
Just my opinion and I am sure there are
a lot of you who disagree. Chuck
|
honololou
10/24/2002
20:21:05 | denuding…
Message:
sounds naughty.
|
chuckventimiglia
10/25/2002
03:30:27 | It is naughty!!
Message:
Kind of funny looking to have a lonesome King on the board. :-]] Chuck
|
mrzor
10/25/2002
08:57:39 | Good idea,
Message:
but if you're playing against an exhibitionist, he might actually enjoy it :-)
|
pavleto
10/27/2002
17:17:55 | Don't hurry with resignation ...
Message:
I resign always when I see unavoidable mate or when my opponent has completely winning position and his play doesn't give me a chance for survive.
I'm not agree with playing to the end, but I'm not agree too with early resign untill I still have chances if my opponent make mistakes.
Here is a game when I had to resign, after very stupid move I made but I decided to play hoping to mistake...and not for long :))
board #408467
Althought winning lost game is not thing that should improve your selfesteame, chess is sport too and you have to fight first before resign.
|
lonewolf58
10/30/2002
23:14:14 | ON DRAGGING THE GAME OUT
Message:
Perhaps the late resignations are a way to artificially inflate your rating.Say your rating is 1495 and you would like to be eligable to accept opponents challenges who desire a 1500 rating or higher.If you stall and wait until your next victory you will enable yourself to play better opposition.I don't agree with this tactic but it may be an explination.
|
atrifix
10/30/2002
23:32:13 | Ratings
Message:
It should be noted that the rating difference is calculated at the END of the game, not at the beginning. Let's say your rating is 2000. If you start a game with a 1200 and get into a lost position after 10 moves, you could resign immediately and lose 32 points, but if you drag the game out and the 1200 climbs to 2400, you only lose 1 rating point when you resign. This has some adverse effects: as lonewolf mentioned, accepting challenges, pairings in tournaments, things like that.
|
triangulator
10/31/2002
06:12:54 | good point
Message:
this is what i felt a opp. of my was doing but it is hard to go up that fast, he dragged a game a rook and 2 pawns down as far as he could and I had only gone up 100 points from when we started. this game lasted for like 4-5 months
|
|
Post a reply to this message:
|
Please log in to your account to play chess online!