♡ 32 ( +1 | -1 ) well...Many different reasons probably. When I was learning I played out most of my games to the bitter end just to see how it was done. I was watching and learning. Sometimes an opponet would "fall asleep" and make a blunder letting me back in the game. I even won a couple like that. Mostly, I was just trying to learn.
♡ 34 ( +1 | -1 ) because...just to bug you! You're an excellent player, c'mon, flex your chess muscle! There's plenty of room for brilliant combinations, especially when your army is bigger.
Or how about this, a format where you get penalized in hours determined by how many points you are down (better even up exchanges quickly)? It's too crazy for me to work out :P
♡ 19 ( +1 | -1 ) AndI am in the Olympics against a couple of 2000+ players. Now they will kick my a**, I know that. But I think I owe it to the team to keep on fighting till the very bitter end!
♡ 24 ( +1 | -1 ) triangulator ..remember alot of people are still learning or trying to learn how to defend in a bad situation , even if the outcome is still a loss .. they want to learn how to defend better for the next time .
♡ 43 ( +1 | -1 ) Learning experienceYup, I agree with most of the opinions raised by fellow GK members. You learn something even if you are in a loosing position. Besides, don't you want to deliver mate? Everybody resigns nowadays that you don't even have the opportunity to deliver the killer blow!
As shirov once said 'In winning positions, people tend to forget that there is some hard work to be done before a game is truly won'
♡ 14 ( +1 | -1 ) re: very good reason for thisI dont think there is a lot to be learnt from an endgame where you are say a piece or more down.(if there is a great difference in rateing)
♡ 19 ( +1 | -1 ) People who expect...their opponents to resign are just lazy. If you are a better player and have an advantage then it shouldn't be too hard to finish them off. Surely it is a player's right to carry on trying to the end.
♡ 19 ( +1 | -1 ) Re: people who expect.I have no problem with people playing to the end, what does annoy me slightly is some players tendency to take longer and longer time (as their position deteriorates).
♡ 23 ( +1 | -1 ) I totally agree parrvert, anyone who is arrogent enough to expect players to just resign when they may play on deserves to make a mistake!!! I am not a great player, so i carry on til the end to try and learn! & u neva no, the world is unpredictable!!!!
♡ 80 ( +1 | -1 ) me personallyI always feel sorta bad when I don't resign when I'm down a piece and/or in a bad position. I try to play quickly then and try one plan or the other, when I see that my opponent has no trouble whatsoever to see through them, I usually give up.
I can relate to the feeling players get when they're way up and there's no chance other than a really bad mistake. Games stretch on and on, which annoys me some, as I don't yet have so many games and can't play as many as I'd like. I respect their decision anyway. Once I had a mate in two and my opponent would leave without making his last possible move. I wrote a sort of annoyed email, and he said it was none of my business whatsoever, and I must say that he's right. It was my mistake...
♡ 28 ( +1 | -1 ) thanks findurieland dont you call me arrogent luke if i am 1-2 peices up on you with an attack your saying you would play on? how would you learn anything?? I would learn more playing brunetti or a titled player and losing positionally than i would playing on a peice or 2 down?
♡ 36 ( +1 | -1 ) I respecta player that doesn't give up. Chess is like life. Anything can happen. I could be down 3 pieces. You'd better still plan on mating me. You want an easy game play jacks with a first grader. The whole world is like this anymore. As the saying goes, it's easy to succeed, because so few people are trying.
♡ 22 ( +1 | -1 ) Yeah, it might be irritating…to have to play on against someone who's beaten and doesn't know it, but not as irritating as listening to you whine about it. This is a tired subject that's already been played out in other threads. Give it up and move on.
♡ 21 ( +1 | -1 ) I Don't WhineIf it's played out, what are you doing responding to it. It's not played out. There are those that wish it were. Butt screw them. It's the whole "Give it up and move on." mentallity that we're talking about here.
♡ 18 ( +1 | -1 ) Get a grip, dotsons…I was responding to triangulator, not you. I actually agree with you and had considered giving you a plus. I respond because I'm simply sick of hearing people whine on and on about opponents who don't resign.
♡ 28 ( +1 | -1 ) butthat still doesnt tell me what you learn or gain - i am not getting this i have quit when down a peice every time when playing a better opponent and it has probably saved some energy for the next game i will play
♡ 139 ( +1 | -1 ) Ussdotsons"I respect a player that doesn't give up. Chess is like life. Anything can happen. I could be down 3 pieces. You'd better still plan on mating me. You want an easy game play jacks with a first grader. The whole world is like this anymore. As the saying goes, it's easy to succeed, because so few people are trying."
All I can say is players like Kramnik and Kasparov resign instead of going on in positions where only a miracle can save them. Actually, I havent heard of GM (or IM or FM or NM) who plays 3 or even 1 or 2 pieces down. If you look at top GameKnot players you can see they resign in such positions.
IMO there are two major misconceptions here
1) Never resign = recipe of success
Simply not true - in 99% of cases really strong players resign in (practically!) hopeless positions.
2) Never resign = fight
Again, not true. If you play Brunetti and lose 3 pieces, the game is over. The rest is childs play for him. It is not a question of how many moves there were in the game (or how much time the game took) if most of them were made in (practically) hopeless position. If you play a strong opponent and lose 3 pieces after 20 moves, it doesnt matter if it takes another 20 moves for him to mate you, because the fight was over after 20 moves (or perhaps even sooner)...the rest is not a fight for him, just an easy mop-up operation :)
♡ 39 ( +1 | -1 ) It's clearthat there are people here who are claiming you have to resign in lost positions and that there are other ones who find you have not. Discussing this seems not to bring them closer to each other. Therefore it's maybe a good idea that Mike add a line on the profile where you can inform if you yes or no want to resign in hopeless positions. So we can play for fun, not for annoyance.
♡ 54 ( +1 | -1 ) Thats very true kaiserpaul, sorry if you thought i called you arrogant triangulator, but you have basically said the total opposite to what i believe! If i was playing you triangulator, i would definitely play on because there are a number of small things i consider useful that i learn every game even if it seems useless to you. And isnt chess about fun aswell as competition?? so therefore quitting before its over doesnt complete the whole objective! This sounds like a socialogy or philosophy lesson!!! :)
♡ 7 ( +1 | -1 ) triangulator ..luke666Read the thread "please resign' ... I brought it back up for you to look at.
♡ 5 ( +1 | -1 ) :) that spoils the fun of arguing over it again!!!
♡ 4 ( +1 | -1 ) LukeBy the way. Next move, checkmate. :-DDDDD
♡ 42 ( +1 | -1 ) Hey peppe…to take your argument to its logical conclusion, why even bother playing someone as strong as Brunetti? There is a 99% chance that you will lose, so conserve your energy and resign after 1. e4. I think its interesting that his name always comes up in these threads, but I can't recall him ever complaining about opponents who don't resign when he thinks they should. Maybe he has too much class.