Some people are saying that not resigning when you are losing very bad is impolite. I tend to just play it because there still is a chance that my opponent might make a blunder and I can win.
It depends on what you want to do. I personally resign when without counterplay but there is not right or wrong answer to this.
I think it's okay to play on in an utterly hopeless position provided that you move quickly. If you spend time on your moves when your opponent's win is trivial then that is wasting their time. Having said that, resigning when there is absolutely no chance of avoiding loss is quite normal and shows respect for your opponent.
Of course, you don't automatically resign in any lost position. Only when it is utterly hopeless. If there's any chance of saving it, play on.
Of course, you don't automatically resign in any lost position. Only when it is utterly hopeless. If there's any chance of saving it, play on.
At the playing level where both players can still make blunders, I would say play on. I've seen Classical 1700 Glicko2 players still make blunders, including me. If the opponent has played solid chess and has just queened a pawn while you have nothing left but your king then you could resign... or play for the stalemate blunder! But play quickly at that point. It might even encourage the other player to be careless. Time enough to learn resignation etiquette when you become a National Master.
I'm a 1700 and im going to be playing in a FIDE tournament soon. Can you explain resignation etiquette.
@SKATEITALL2009 said in #5:
> I'm a 1700 and im going to be playing in a FIDE tournament soon. Can you explain resignation etiquette.
You storm off like Carlsen, the Maggie. Just kidding. Tipping your King or telling the organizer if you want to be sure. Do not use resignation to goad information out of your opponent.
> I'm a 1700 and im going to be playing in a FIDE tournament soon. Can you explain resignation etiquette.
You storm off like Carlsen, the Maggie. Just kidding. Tipping your King or telling the organizer if you want to be sure. Do not use resignation to goad information out of your opponent.
@SKATEITALL2009 said in #1:
> Some people are saying that not resigning when you are losing very bad is impolite. I tend to just play it because there still is a chance that my opponent might make a blunder and I can win.
It depends what you mean by losing. If you are down a piece, even a major one, then no. But if you've been pulverized and are frantically moving your king around the board, then yes it is extremely rude.
> Some people are saying that not resigning when you are losing very bad is impolite. I tend to just play it because there still is a chance that my opponent might make a blunder and I can win.
It depends what you mean by losing. If you are down a piece, even a major one, then no. But if you've been pulverized and are frantically moving your king around the board, then yes it is extremely rude.
Don't resign if you think you still have a chance, no matter how small, or if you want to keep playing. And don't worry about what your opponent is thinking.
But yeah, if you are 2 queens down, maybe play a bit faster.
But yeah, if you are 2 queens down, maybe play a bit faster.
@SKATEITALL2009 said in #1:
> Some people are saying that not resigning when you are losing very bad is impolite. I tend to just play it because there still is a chance that my opponent might make a blunder and I can win.
I think you have hear this before, It depends on the position.
You see, when you play chess, you always try to generate an attack. If you can mate, it doesnt matter if you have less material. You get points for winning, not for having more material. Now, if he has more material, as long as you can generate a matting attack, you are still in the game. If you can clearly not mate, nor have chance or recouping that material, sure, just resign.
Now, at your rating, the blunder rate is gigantic, you might want to stick a bit longer and hope for a draw or something.
But once you reach around 2k, if you have no attack, just resign. People still blunder obviously, but they are way better at ending up games.
> Some people are saying that not resigning when you are losing very bad is impolite. I tend to just play it because there still is a chance that my opponent might make a blunder and I can win.
I think you have hear this before, It depends on the position.
You see, when you play chess, you always try to generate an attack. If you can mate, it doesnt matter if you have less material. You get points for winning, not for having more material. Now, if he has more material, as long as you can generate a matting attack, you are still in the game. If you can clearly not mate, nor have chance or recouping that material, sure, just resign.
Now, at your rating, the blunder rate is gigantic, you might want to stick a bit longer and hope for a draw or something.
But once you reach around 2k, if you have no attack, just resign. People still blunder obviously, but they are way better at ending up games.
Entirely a personal preference. If you ask the majority, half will say fight to the death, and half will say resign, and 0% will say offer draw.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.