Why don't people resign lost games?

Let me start by saying that the answer to this question is kind of obvious - no game is truly lost since time is an important element of bullet/blitz, and of course anyone can blunder, we've all seen it. Nevertheless....

Let me also add that I'm mostly talking about bullet with *increment*, which is what I normally play. Or more generally, instances where you're quite unlikely to flag your opponent because they have more than enough time.

Finally I'm not really talking about being down a knight in the midgame, I'm talking about getting to King vs King + Queen endgames, etc. and STILL not resigning.

------------

1. It is disrespectful and spiteful, since it's like saying "you don't know how to checkmate".
2. It is a waste of both players' time and it is completely uninteresting, since it involves shuffling pieces around.
3. It has a negligible effect on rating, since if your actual skill as a player is X, not resigning these games will never actually bring your rating much above X (but yes, it objectively raises your *effective* rating some small amount).
4. If you succeed in not losing such a game, you're mildly amused and your opponent is throwing their phone across the room.

------------

Does this bother you as much as it does me? If you're a never resign kind of player, can you explain why (and why the above points don't matter to you)? I'm seriously curious.

@poidude
I only resign when the position is hopeless. Like opponent up a lot of material

resign when you have only a king. or when you are down +5 material ( or in an obviously lost endgame where pawn will surely promote)
Don't be disrespectful and don't claim you are "learning something" unless you are under 1000. at that point you should know how to close when up a lot of material. It's just another tactic of stalling IMO

(of course play on if you have compensation or there are hopes that are not easily spottable one move traps)

Everyone hopes for stalemate :)

Anything can happen, especially in bullet. You might get overconfident or something and blunder somehow. I have managed to blunder several winning games. The only thing that really gets on my nerves, is if people play on in correspondence. That really is inexcusable, in my opinion (I’m talking about positions where you are up at least a piece, because in correspondence that is a simple conversion). I personally play on in blitz and bullet, if there is time trouble or swindling chances, but anything longer I will resign in.

Why do people take it personally because some people like to finish games they start?

Because if you think it's a respect issue you seem to be implying that people resign in games unless they're playing you.

That is not true. Lots of people like to finish games they start.

At every point in a chess game there's an opportunity to find the best move. From now on enjoy that opportunity until the game is over. Problem solved.

@poidude Now you are just opening a can of worms, but I'll go there. It's Sunday, in a world wide hysteria with Martial Law lite in nearly all corners of the planet.

I can only speak for myself, of course. So why I don't resign in obvious lost positions is because I'm trying to rattle my opponent through a show of disrespect, hoping that something will happen like a mouse slip, stalemate, or they have a heart attack. Maybe the cat runs across the keyboard, there is a disconnection. It's hope chess. All the cool kids play it. It's like smoking cigarettes, it doesn't have to make sense.

Then if I won by some unforeseen miracle of fate, I could turn to my baby sister(assuming I had one, which i don't btw) and say to her, "look at that game baby, my rating went up 8 points, I'm a hero, right? ".

"Listen baby, you are going to say I'm a hero, or there is no more candy for you, I'll wait until you learn to speak if I have to".

I’ve seen a 2600 vs a 2550 blitz who managed to stalemate in Q+K vs lone K only yesterday with time on the clock. He played perfect till deep in the late game pushing his advantage more and more, I would’ve lost about 5 gazillion times playing any of them up to this point, while timing out in the meantime. Then all he had to do was sac his N to promote a Q, a tactic I saw in <2 sec during live play. Instead he made a game losing blunder but his opponent didn’t punish he seemed so focused on trying to repeat the position that he got complete tunnel vision by the looks of things.

It’s never over. Don’t give your opponent any credit, ever. Never resign. Maybe by being as obnoxious as possible you make the opponent throw their phone out of the window? 😁