@Morozov @TLNextChampion You overrate normal 1300-1400 chess players. I would have at least 40% chance to make the same mistake as his opponent and another 5% to stalemate with the queen anyway. But I agree if you played better, your opponent would be less likely to play until the end. So as beginners, not resigning is never disrespectful, while as good players, I don’t know.
I don't think it's disrespectful. What other sport/game there is that it would be? If a soccer team is up 6-0 at half time, is it disrespectful for the other team to keep on playing? There is the time allotted, so there you have it. Painful it might be, but I see no disrespect. If it's really a completely losing position, then just finish it off when you can. Don't whine about it. Having said that, if I only have my King left and the opponent has multiple pieces still, I would resign. Nothing to do with respect. Just realizing it's pointless. Not resigning though would still be my choice. And privilege. It's a game. How can fighting till the end be seen as disrespectful?
Yes its totally disrespectful. Shame on you Carlsen for not resigning against Kuzubov and Kovalev (-21 acc. Sesse).
@helldesk What you may not understand is that the comparison between these sports makes no sense. Football is a spectator sport and the end score matters too and as long as both teams have most of their men on the field interesting plays can happen. In chess a loss is a loss and no one is interested in watching or playing KQ vs K, in football there is a difference between a 7-0 and a 7-1.
For that reason the idea of resignation is unheard of in football, but in chess its common sense.
"fighting till the end" is complete nonsense if the fight was over 10 moves ago, and it has absolutely nothing to do with fighting spirit or "muh time". Its just pointless. Don't steal your opponents time for no reason. There are rare exceptions in chess, like Byrne vs Fischer but that just that, rare exceptions.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.