62 ( +1 | -1 )
totally won ... opponent would not resign
i really do not appreciate it when an opponent would not resign even if his/her situation is totally hopeless.
it's really fine when it's otb, but on gk, i don't think so.
add to the frustration ... the opponent waits until it's just several hours b4 he/she loses on overstepping the time limit to make another move, then repeats the process.
what can i do ?
my opponent has played more than 300 games on gk. i'm sure that he/she can analyze an endgame involving just 2 pieces on each side.
i already feel like resigning to say that the game is not important anymore and i have learned from the experience ... but that would be so rude.
26 ( +1 | -1 )
I once openend a threat aobut the same thing, but wouldn't care about that, you know you won, so I don't mind waiting :)
well, even if your opponent is hopefully lost you can still make a "msitake" and draw the game....
happened to me a few times...
33 ( +1 | -1 )
There's nothing positive that you can do. Don't resign yourself --- that's just allowing your opponent's strategy to succeed. Be patient, and of course, don't ever play him again. Something else you can do in the future, if you have time, is to check your prospective opponent's past games: if there's evidence of bad behaviour, pass up on him.
14 ( +1 | -1 )
Before accepting a challange
I always look at opponents past history. There are players with 1000+ gameswho have never resigned a game
15 ( +1 | -1 )
One piece of advise
Do not chat with him suggesting he resign. This always slows the moves down. Play it out and move on. Put himon your ignore list.
61 ( +1 | -1 )
Why do you have an attitude against an opponent who chooses to play by the rules? You treat the other person as a means to your own satisfaction, rather than as a fellow human being. If you have not demonstartated comity to him already, for what reason should he have comity to you?
Treat the other player the way you would want to be treated. Period. Instead, you want HIM to treat YOU the way YOU want to be treated. This is self-centered and destructive behaviour.
Why the rush to victory over this guy? Why can't you learn some patience and wisdom? Why can't you meet him as a fellow person and chat about non-chess things and enjoy him as a person?
4 ( +1 | -1 )
Is courtesy a concept that you recognise?
42 ( +1 | -1 )
I see you are a new member
and all of the advice you have been offered above is excellent. I would also advise you play mini and regular tournaments. I have found there is less of this item there, although there is the problem of players not starting the thematics properly. Also, if you play more games, the ones that are slower don't stand out as much. Hope this helped a little. Sincerely, Skip
153 ( +1 | -1 )
" Why do you have an attitude against an opponent who chooses to play by the rules ? "
this has happened with me with different opponents, but this is the only time that the opponent seems actually making me suffer the waiting : letting the 3 days dwindle into around just a day, then making a move, then i make a move, then he/she repeats the pattern.
he was not like this early in the game. and i do know that he/she logs on and play his other games ( i check his/her other games 4 activity .)
i do not treat the other player in any manner bad. in fact, i haven't sent him any message at all. i have considered resigning, but did not because i knew that it was rude.
" Treat the other player the way you would want to be treated. Period. Instead, you want HIM to treat YOU the way YOU want to be treated. This is self-centered and destructive behaviour. "
i hope that u r not assuming that i am treating the other player without any respect.
playing well is very honorable, is it not ?
all that i am saying on this thread is that this player must know that there are consequences 4 him/her and 4 me when he/she does this ( spiteful ) pattern of playing in a lost position ...
... it would mean a waste of time 4 him/her and 4 me . ( to clarify : if he/she is repeating the pattern to spite me, then he/she must know that his/her position is totally lost. )
of course, i can still make mistakes ...
and perhaps, u r right that i will learn patience and wisdom from this experience.
but please do not assume that i do not have any respect 4 my opponent.
59 ( +1 | -1 )
You have absolutely NO way of gauging whether your opponent is simply someone who logs on every 3 days.. or if he is purposely waiting till the few hours are left. You have NO way of knowing whether ur opponent is an expert at chess familiar with all the different types of endgames or if he is an amateur who would learn a lot by finishing end games. You have NO way of knowing whether this particular opponent feels that it is rude to steal your satisfaction of checkmating him by resigning or if he is honestly trying to delay the game.
So many unknowns you should at least KNOW when to not shoot your mouth off.
42 ( +1 | -1 )
(me) white : Ra8, pd5, pf2, pg2, ph3, Ne5, Kg1
black : Kh8, Nh6, Nf8, pc5, ph7, pg7, pf6
black to move
i just want to ask you now :
how did you come to the conclusion that i will derive satisfaction in checkmating this particular opponent ?
i just want to finish the game and move on to another.
as far as the position is concerned ... a player who has had more than 300 games and who is currently playing complicated games will definitely see where the game is headed.
of course, u r right, i should not speculate .
25 ( +1 | -1 )
i won't comment ont he game as that is against the rules here at gameknot.. but i will say that if he has many active games.. or simply not much time. then he may not be able to devote the analysis necessary to come to the same conclusion that you have
30 ( +1 | -1 )
reread my first post in this thread. i made no comment whatsoever referring to you taking pleasure in checkmating him. you misunderstood my comment.
what i meant was that he may think you would. or that in general people take pleasure in checkmating people and that resigning in his book may be rude.
60 ( +1 | -1 )
Don't sweat the small stuff. Your game is well in hand so accept your well earned victory and move on to the next challenge when this one grinds down. This may sound a bit cold to some, but every time someone drags out a hopeless game to the bitter end is actually hurting themselves more than they are hurting you. They must watch closly to get their move in at the last minute, thereby, re-living the defeat over and over. You should feel sorry for that person rather than ire. Just my thoughts on the subject.......
42 ( +1 | -1 )
Finishing people off is an essential part of the learning process of playing effective chess.
In a game I am playing at the moment I lost an exchange (R for B) quite early on but played on - now I have B + 5 pawns v R + 3 and good chances.
I am not a "never resign" player, though. In this game,
board #852633, I resigned without actually being any material down, yet.
7 ( +1 | -1 )
Accept the things you can't change. Change the things you can. Know the difference.
22 ( +1 | -1 )
When a game is totally lost. PLEASE!! Dropping an exchange in the opening of a game is not a reason to resign, but playing a game out with ZERO winning chances is a waste of your opponents time, and RUDE!!
20 ( +1 | -1 )
Here is an example
1. e4 c5
2. Nf3 d6
3. Nc3 Nf6
4. Bc4 Qb6
5. O-O Bg4
6. d3 Nc6
7. Nd5 Nxd5
8. exd5 Nd4
9. h3 Bxf3
10. gxf3 g6
11. c3 Nf5
12. Be3 Qxb2
13. Qa4+ Kd8
14. Rf-b1 Qxc3
15. Rb3 Qc2
16. Kf1 Bg7
17. Rxb7 Qxa4
18. Ra-b1 Nxe3+
19. Ke2 Nxc4
20. Rb7-b8+ Rxb8
21. Rxb8+ Kc7
22. Rxh8 Bxh8
23. dxc4 Qxc4+
24. Ke3 Qd4+
25. Ke2 c4
26. f4 Qd3+
27. Ke1 Bc3#
Why was this game played out to mate????
10 ( +1 | -1 )
Because games don't end until checkmate. It's your opponent's decision to resign, so it shouldn't bother you.
26 ( +1 | -1 )
One game somebody
commanded that I stopped wasting his time because I was a piece down; I checkmated him 4 moves later... . The only time when I think it is rude to play on is when you have rook (or queen) + king vs king... or things like that.
27 ( +1 | -1 )
No one has to resign
I have a game right now where the opponent is
hopelessly lost. He will not resign -- which is his
right. I suppose he is hoping I will blunder and he
will get a stalemate. But he does not have to resign
-- it is his right to play on to the bitter end. It is
also my right to not play him again.
59 ( +1 | -1 )
I agree with you pretty much. But I have been in games where I make the person mate me if they don't display that they know how to.
For example if they have K+Q vs K and they just keep checking me with thier Q rather than bringing their king up. It shows me they need work on their endgame so I force them to mate me. I don't think of it as rude, I think I am doing them a favor by pointing their weakness out to them even tho I am losing.
22 ( +1 | -1 )
it gives you the opportunity to practice your endgames-i, personally, hate it when people resign when "all is lost", because it isn't all lost...i mean-"all is lost" when your king is against 2 bishops, but do you resign?!?...
90 ( +1 | -1 )
to the complainers
This used to bother me quite a lot when playing OTB chess. I thought it was an insult that a C-player would keep playing when a piece down without compensation. Then in one game where I had been 2 pieces up for about 20 moves my opponent sat bolt upright and exclaimed that he was down 2 pieces, how did that happen and resigned. Sometimes your opponent doesn't realize that they are lost. Maybe they have thrown away positions as good or better than the one you have.
Besides this is internet chess. Unlike OTB chess you are not forced to sit there waiting for the game to finish. If your position is so good that you feel that your opponent is wasting your time it shouldn't take more than a couple of seconds to make your move while playing the rest of your games.
19 ( +1 | -1 )
This gives you a chance to work on your game. I'm playing a game right now and with every move my opponent makes I get to set them up for another fork with my knight.
67 ( +1 | -1 )
In my opinion. when a chesser agrees to play a game with an opponent, he or she agrees to the rules of chess and the time control of the game.
It is rude, whether here on GK or OTB to insist on changing the rules during the game without the agreement of the opponent.
This is a contract. If you will not respect the contract for a particular chess game, then you will probably be unreliable in other contracts in life.
The question here has nothing to do with the opponent. It has everything to do with the integrity and character of the complainer.
The culture of victory presumes a culture of contempt. Although the endophens produced by victory are very pleasureable, the costs paid with lessened integrity are too great.
163 ( +1 | -1 )
In the July 2003 edition of the USA publication, Chess Life, page 27, Women's International Master (WIM), Alexey Root, stated: "In the 2003 US Amateur Team East, I won a rook against a 1600 (Class B) player. As my opponent continued making moves, a series of annoying thoughts crossed my mind. . . 'Doesn't he know he's playing a former US Women's Chess Champion? I know how to win a rook up; this is ridiculous.' . . . (anticipating victory) 'I can finally go eat with my teammates' "
How rude of this WIM!!
She had been a class B player in the past. Why would she be so selfish as to want to win before the other player has learnt all he can from the continued struggle. Who cares about her past glories. Instead, she should learn patience and comity toward her lowly opponent.
WIM Root agreed to the terms of the tournament. She agreed to play a Class B player. She agreed to play within the time control. She agreed to her opponent's right to struggle. She agreed to his right to play up to the limit of HIS time control.
Chess is NOT a game! It is an experience, engaged in THROUGH a game. By the nature of chess, we should learn greater integrity, the internal harmonious integration that comes from the thinking process for the next idea. By the nature of chess, we should learn greater character, that persistence of personality, by continuing the struggle until the "chess position holds (no further) interest for you."
By developing integrity and character in chess, one can transfer these personal traits to life in general. To intimidate the opponent, or to harass him or her, into a possible resignation is a sign of dishonor, no matter what the chess strength difference or the decisiveness of the position happens to be.
142 ( +1 | -1 )
I dont know the whole story here but based on what you wrote WIM Root never intimidated or harassed her opponent? She merely described her _thoughts_ during the game in a chess magazine.
It is true no rule forces anyone to resign, but IMHO unless one plays till mate because of some sort of principle, the decision when to resign must be connected to the playing strength of opponent (very important point people often forget). It is ridiculous to continue K vs K+R vs 2500+ GM because in previous tournament 1100 opponent failed to mate you in similar endgame. Also IMHO it is often rude not to resign in trivially lost position because of instructive purposes. For example if you are not sure how K+R mates vs K BUT you are 100% your opponent knows how to do it, why not resign and study it from a good book? Or resign and politely ask your opponent to teach you how its done? Maybe he will even analyze the game and tell you why you ended up to a lost endgame in the first place. Yes Drgandalf, you have a good point about being selfish, but it isnt always the higher-rated player who is selfish :-)
Obviously no matter whether your opponent resigns early or plays till mate, it is never a reason to be unpolite or forget good manners. It is best not to feel annoyed - just take it easy and finish the game. In 99% of the cases there is no reason to take it as an insult anyway.
7 ( +1 | -1 )
K vs. K+B+N vs. a 2500+ GM? do all grandmasters know how to checkmate with these pieces?
97 ( +1 | -1 )
hi and thanks to all !
as the gk fan who started this thread, i would like to thank all of you for expressing your opinions regarding the matter.
although it was painful for me to read what some of you posted, i have learned a lot, primarily humility, and am grateful to all of you.
i now have an opponent who is playing a lost position and making a move only on the last day b4 the ned of the limit. however, now, i do see the value of playing the whole game out ( if i make a very slight mistake, it will be stalemate ).
even then, if my position were more overwhelming, i would not mind ( anymore, now that i am wiser, thanks to all of you, ) playing it out to mate, or to stalemate. my opponent and i can learn from the game every step of the way.
i also now understand that i cannot and must not impose anything, and that i should play by the rules.
ALSO, I WOULD LIKE TO APOLOGIZE TO ALL WHOM I MIGHT HAVE OFFENDED THRU MY POSTS ON THIS BOARD. I AM SORRY AND I PROMISE NOT TO REPEAT MY MISTAKES HERE.
thanks again !
127 ( +1 | -1 )
One thing I have to point out
Surprisingly many players here at GK move very fast vs higher rated opponents and start using more time only after they feel they are in difficult position! The though process is more or less "Oops! Now I really have to start spending more time in order to save this one!" :-) I have made the same mistake myself when I had the privilege of playing one of the top guns of GK - I though the position was fairly quiet and made "obvious" moves fast. Then I missed a strong move by my opponent and got into big trouble. I saw my position as "very difficult" but the truth is I was already lost, and my opponent - who obviously was stronger player than me - knew he was winning.
This "food chain" is merciless, if you feel your position is difficult and your opponent is considerably stronger than you, very often he has already seen the winning plan :-)
Of course it is easy for higher rated player to see this as dragging the game, even though in reality his lower rated opponent simply cant see that the game is lost.
IMO people have to realize the point of resignation always depends on skill levels of players, and even then we are often talking about thin red line.
39 ( +1 | -1 )
Very good Point Pep
I agree with that totally. Also I think part of the problem is the intrest in the game. For once a player sees the end of the game and knows he has it won the game is of no further intrest.
To the player who only sees that he is in a bad position but believes he can work his way out, the game is very intriguing as he trys to find an escape or stalemate. So to each player the game exists in a totally different perspective.
29 ( +1 | -1 )
in the past
I have politely resigned games after blundering and immediately challenged back only to have the return game refused. This is annoying. And so is challenging someone you have had a bit of friendly banter with in the forums only for them to turn you down for a made-up reason.
72 ( +1 | -1 )
This past Saturday
I played in an OTB tournament. My first opponent, a 13 year old girl, had only a king and locked pawns on the board against my king, queen, rook, and locked pawns. Yet, she persisted right to checkmate. I have played her before, and I am well aware she knew the mating routine by heart.
I had no problem with her discipline to play to the bitter end, without hope, without rescue. I relaxed and enjoyed completing the sculptured ending.
Her reason for going the distance is HERS, not mine. If her discipline helps her improve, who am I to dispute it. Actually, I think her discipline DOES help her, as both she and I have gained 200 rating points in the past 12 months. Although my method of improvement is more appropriate for ME, hers may be more appropriate for HER.
5 ( +1 | -1 )
Drgandalf. A nice bit of wisdom I shall remember.