Free online Chess server. Play Chess now in a clean interface. No registration, no ads, no plugin required. Play Chess with the computer, friends or random opponents.
Sign in
  1. Forum
  2. General Chess Discussion
  3. What is the psychology behind this type of non resignation?


That's right. This has nothing to do with psychology. It's just a matter recognizing a losing position and playing whatever you can to avoid a certain slow death.


In the MAJORITY of games where I have a losing position, I will start looking for ways to trade material for possible initiative, possible tactical-shots, possible mating attack.

It's got nothing to do with tantrums.
It's just how chess players play chess.

If playing conventional promises a slow, certain, death...
...then something unconventional, daring, sacrificial, and lucky, is the only chance that's left.

Most of the time I end up turning my losing position into a completely losing position, and at that point, I resign.

But as long as there are tricks in the position for my opponent to miss, then I will play on.

Note: "Hoping that my opponent self-mates" and "tricks in the position", are not the same thing.


Chess Etiquette 101: If you have a *completely* losing position, it's impolite not to resign.
It sends the message that although someone was strong enough to make you completely losing, that they're stupid enough to self-mate.

Just resign the game and offer a rematch if you want to play on.

It sounds like the biggest surprise to many of the people in this chat might be that many of the players you play online aren't adults. Probably many of them are teenagers, and as a result have some maturing left to do.

By the way @Onyx_Chess and @Zenmode167, I don't think the OP is referring to adopting a strategy of trading off pieces; the OP is referring to their opponent, say, blundering a piece, and then proceeding to literally give away material (not trade): actively putting their other pieces en prise. In my experience, their resignation (if it ever comes) is preceded by them letting the clock run down for a while.


Thank you for making those points for me. The psychology of people who misread the obvious is interesting as well. Probably they feel uncomfortable when someone is criticised and they hanker after a world where no one is ever at fault.

The psychology of no resing, mmm, nope, that thing does not exist, they just try to make you blunder and make draw

Everything you are saying is right. I guess I wasn't clear with respect to my own judgement of my own behavior. My previous post didn't include my acknowledgement that this behaviour is that of an imbecilic baby. In my case indeed it was! I don't hide it or regret it. Sometimes I lose and get pissed off at how poorly I handled the game and I throw a tantrum (I'm over 60 so I guess growing up is out of the question :) ). Absolutely true.

My opponent still gets to win quickly. I have never launched a verbal tirade and insult my opponent. No rules are broken. So I say if this bothers someone too bad. Wait for my tantrum to end and enjoy your win.

This behaviour is harmless release of aggression and frustration.

By the way - I'm surprised i'm the only one admitting to this.

In addition to playing exploding chess at the end of a pathetic blunder, I have also played games wherein I see how long I can move one knight (the same one) until it's captured. Then the next knight. Then you can move a rook back and forth. See how many moves you can make before you have to move a pawn. Etc. I haven't done this in a while because I've been studying and the level of pathetic play is over for me. I now (usually) play chess I'm proud of even when I loose so tantrums aren't required. :)

What can I say? Sometimes, for me, good chess seems like such a hopeless endeavour that I have taken out my frustration by deliberately playing poorly. If it doesn't make sense to you then I can't explain it. But it is not intended to offend my opponent. That is for sure.

I had to come back and re post with personal experience. I just played the most boring 2 loses back to back. My opponents played better earlier on and gained an advantage but simply could not figure out how to finish with their advantages. Like previously stated it got to a point where I just started giving away pieces and trying to self mate because it was just terrible to watch and play. I have no problem losing but I hate resigning. What I hate worse is watching someone not know how to mate especially when they have a clear advantage. To be quite honest with you both games saw the opponent miss mate sequences at least 2x each. It got to a point where I sent both players material on studying end game and they just didn't even care. Their response was I won whats it matter. My response to that is you don't care about the quality and progression of your chess skills. To make matters even worse.... neither play showed up in the analysis room after to analyze their missed opportunities and went straight on to other games....

Please learn how to check mate at least basically. There is nothing worse than a long grueling game when I am finishing purely for the fact that you have played a better game and I want to see you finish it. Even when I am losing I am invested in your success. It's really a shame to see how much people don't study.

But I admit it, I lost and my opponents played better. As a result I just started to self mate and blunder intentionally so that I could move on to playing more games and analysis to keep my day moving. I don't have time to watch other players try and figure it out in the moment.

Flame me all you want, but we all have priorities and goals for how much we want to accomplish in a day. Today was the first time I could play more than 1 game in over a week and it was cut short due to people that can't mate.

@Episcopul It wasn't cut short at all. If you had just resigned, you could have moved on to another game much faster.

Moreover, the amount of time you have available for chess is completely independent of how well/poorly your opponents play. Are you really trying to say that if your opponents had played better then you would have been able to play chess for another 10 minutes? Because that's what you're implying. Either you are available to play chess at that time or you aren't.

@biscuitfiend I do not resign(I do but very rarely. Usually an emergency or real life event and I need to leave the computer then). Keeping with tradition, if your opponent plays clever chess and gets and advantage it is good form to let them finish. There is a possibility they will blunder and you can win if you keep playing, and I do this often because I have witnessed many people who can open and somewhat middle game but can not finish. I have won a multitude of games while down both in material and in positional evaluation, so why would I resign when I have won from bad positions in the past?

The situation regarding my complaint is just that, situational. Both opponents missed mate twice or more, and what could have been over at move 20 went well beyond. So yes, if your opponents are playing poorly enough to not mate, but good enough to keep away all potential threats since they are up material it becomes very boring. Resigning teaches your opponent nothing about how to win. If everyone just resigned when down material or when the position looks bad then nobody would ever learn how to finish an actual game. Resigning does you and your opponent no good. So I am saying if the opponents had even studying a couple end games and check mate strategies then those two games would have taken a total of 30 mins perhaps vs the hour plus it took. So the excess of 30 mins could have easily been one or two more games.

Maybe that's my lone opinion but I don't see the benefit to either side when people resign. Maybe I'm just old school for still believing in chess etiquette and letting my opponent finish after they have gotten the better of me. But either way, my original post was to say yes this does happen and I am also guilty of it. Resigning is lame (my opinion) so if they need help finishing I at least self mate so they have something to analyze later and learn a mate sequence.

@Episcopul I would resign because it is not fun to play in that situation. If my opponent doesn't know basic checkmates, then they're not going to learn them over the board; that comes with private study and practice. I don't play chess with the aim that my opponents can get better, I play with the aim of having a good time. When that stops, I should stop playing.

This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.