I very rarely ever resign because it is important to learn how to draw a lost position. Unless my opponent has a forced mate in X, I am going to make them prove the advantage. Even then, you can play it on the board since I have had many opponents mix up the move order in a forced mate and go on to lose or draw.
The amount of times I have been able to reach stalemate in a K v K+Q ending as the defender is staggering.
My main point is, it is not disrespectful. Everyone including super GMs blunder, and to me the game is not over until you get the mate.
All of this is especially true in the Chess variants of Bullet and Blitz, where time pressure with or without an increment usually decides the games.
Some of you make good points:
- Some people simply like to finish games
- It is good to learn how to draw a lost position
That's fair, to an extent.
Not resigning a lost position is still objectively disrespectful. Reaching stalemate in K+Q v K has absolutely nothing to do with your skill and everything to do with your opponent's. That makes it a question of "respect" - do you respect your opponent (basically meaning their rating) enough to expect them to win from here?
Nobody is personally offended, I'm just saying it's aggravating because it's such a tedious, uninteresting waste of time to close out such games. And you don't truly learn anything from it beyond a certain point.
As a bullet player I do try and flag my opponents, but at the same time, if you're versing someone much more higher rated down a piece and with no possible way of flagging and don't resign, that's disrespectful, it's like saying "You're a noob, you're trash at chess and I'm a pro", I usually resign in positions like that, but if an opponent is lower rated, that's a different question. They are more likely to blunder, fall for a trap, so not resigning is like testing, saying "OK, you won some advantage, but can you convert it?" if they beat you then good for them and GG, if not, that's a motivation for them to study, win-win. But also, as the forum is about people who don't resign, I will tell one thing, the people who wait for their time to run out are such disrespectful people, not only do they do it worse for themselves, they also just darken your day.
Like #13 said, refusing to resign isn't really "disrespectful" on its own. Some people simply like to play games to a decisive end.
The players who tick me off are the ones who let their clock run down and keep me waiting. Sometimes they keep the tab open in their browser so that it shows they're still present at the game, but don't make a move until the last second so that Lichess doesn't catch them for poor sportsmanship.
#1 It is peoples moral and legal right to resign, or play-on as they please.
#2 It is not 'disrespectful' nor any of your business what they decide to choose.
#3 Although, I am in support of you making this thread, as I think it encourages meaningful discussion.
But it is not the type of discussion that interests me, personally.
Just gave a few thoughts there, that's all.
@poidude In my personal opinion: you have the right to resign whenever you want if at all. If it was truly disrespectful that would be stated in the rules of chess. The game is NEVER over until it is over- it's like working hard in school until the final exams and getting burnt out in June- I have met many such opponents. I tailor my resignations to my opponents- if they are similarly or higher rated, they have enough of an advantage (both on the clock and on the board) and they seem to have the right idea trying to mate my king, I resign.
@poidude Respect is earned, and not just given based on some arbitrary number.
I have personally witnessed very highly rated players failing with the most basic of checkmates. Everyone is human, and everyone can make mistakes. It is not disrespectful to force your opponent to prove their knowledge of the game, regardless of rating.
If one finds the act of someone not resigning to their all powerful rating disrespectful, one needs to check their ego.
you can always somehow get a lucky draw. its not like most players are super grandmasters. also even gm's still blunder games away
It depends on the time control and you and your opponents rating.
Low rated players are coached to play on and try to make the position complicated, for one. But playing for stalemate or three fold in blitz or bullet is perfectly valid at any rating.
Basically you agreed to play your opponent at a particular time control and they are withing their rights to play to the end.
It would only be disrespectful if they stopped trying to win or draw. If they play on in a serious manner then it's perfectly copacetic.
