The British itself!

[Matt Mackenzie]

When it comes to resigning I have some sympathy with the view expressed by a past leading GM (Larsen comes to mind, for some reason) that nobody should give up until it is obvious to even a pretty weak player why they have done so.

And I can also relate with what JH said upthread - the hopefully relatively few times I have played on well after I should have, it has been due to some piece of utterly crass self-inflicted stupidity wrecking a perfectly acceptable or even winning position. Going into denial after that is almost natural

[Carl Hibbard]

Jonathan Hawkins - born 1st May 1983, I know because I was there !!

Congratulations to you both, he should also be a forum member of course

[PeterFarr]

I'd like to join everyone else in congratulating Jonathan Hawkins on his fine performance, but perhaps people will forgive a bit of parochialism in pointing out that joint Champion David Howell and new Ladies Champion Amy Hoare are both products of Sussex junior chess. Congratulations to David, Amy, all at SJC and of course Horsham chess club. They do a really great job. I wonder when the last time was when both champions were from the same county.

Also, both have had an occasional turn playing evening chess in the mid Sussex league; I'm thinking of asking our pub landlord to put up a plaque saying that 3-time champion Howell once played in the Jolly Tanners. It could replace the highly dubious and frankly dull claim that the Prince Regent once stayed there.

Ps - on late resigners, the answer is to just play slowly, patiently, and calmly yourself, preferably gobbling up additional material rather than bothering to give mate - i.e. just enjoy the victory for longer. Why worry?

[JustinHorton]

The missus was born in Horsham. Doesn't play chess though.

[Neil Graham]

If people consistently resigned much later than they do, there would be fewer people playing chess, since more of the people who play would get hacked off at late resigners.

I note that Marcus Harvey and James Jackson met in today's round. I played both of them in the 4NCL in 2007/8. Marcus must have been about 11 at the time and clearly no-one had advised him then how to resign! I'm sure that Juniors are taught that they should never give up whatever the deficit.

[JustinHorton]

Not for the first time I'll observe that if I were looking for persistent behaviour problems at the chessboard I wouldn't necessarily be looking in the juniors' direction.

[Neil Graham]

Not for the first time I'll observe that if I were looking for persistent behaviour problems at the chessboard I wouldn't necessarily be looking in the juniors' direction.

In my time at the Championships, there was always one player, now sadly deceased, who we looked forward to welcoming with some trepidation.

However her memories live on here:- http://www.memoriesofwar.org.uk/page_id ... p1p3p.aspx

[Roger de Coverly]

In my time at the Championships, there was always one player, now sadly deceased, who we looked forward to welcoming with some trepidation

If arbiters had a secret manual, she might have been a chapter heading.

[Paul McKeown]

Nothing yet in the rule book states when a player should resign.
Looking at an FM title (which to me means they aint yet good enough to get an IM title)
and saying one should tip their King the minute is looks lost is ridiculous.

Playing on in a so called totally lost position is not bad manners.
You could say it's bad manners if some kibitzer pops up and starts
suggesting that a player should resign.

These people really want to take a good look at themselves and wonder
who on this God's earth do they think they are. Swanning about the place
declaring when games should be finished like some gifted all-seeing arbiter.

Rip their moves to shreds, poke fun at their haricut...but never ever tell a player when to resign.

And we all know there is no such thing as a 'totally lost position'.
How many swindles in so called resignable positions do you want me to post.
(Jonathan B. just posted one.)

Not counting the games where a player has resigned in a won position.
I've had it twice happen against me in serious OTB play.
What was I meant do refuse the resignation?
(Actually I did in one case v Alun Murphy - I said 'let's just call it a draw.)

I've also had an opponent resign against me when he was winning in a
correspondence game (using the old snail mail)!

The player will resign when they are ready to resign and should not be
prompted or bullied into doing so by looks of shock and horror.

Play the whistle.

Couldn't agree more, Geoff. The sanctimony of the "resign when I tell you to" and the "resign when I show you my FIDE certificate" brigades is nauseating. Faced with the choice of listening to their pious homilies and self delusional preening, I would prefer to join those who would seek to abolish resignation altogether. It's the losing party's privilege to chose if and when. End of discussion.

[Geoff Chandler]

Hi Paul,

I have this bother on average once a month on RHP
when players won't resign and another complains.

Some players (bless them) think it is actually rude to reisgn
thus robbing their opponent of the pleasure of giving checkmate.

A few years ago some lad tried to bring in a rule that all games
must go to a checkmate. Resigning was to be made illegal.
I would love to see that tried just as an experiment.
Players would construct ingenious self-mates and I just know
the tally of swindles, cheapo's and stalemates would rise.

There is simply no pleasing some people.
They complain when a players resigns just as they are about to
play the checkmate in a neat combination. Whilst others will say
how sporting it was of them to allow the checkmate.

Yet the same people moan when a player does not resign......

We all know how miserable we sometimes feel when we are lost
without a shred of hope. Some need time to compose themselves and
accept it. Leave them alone, they will resign when they want to resign.

[JustinHorton]

Well, let's make the point again: if people feel they are being made to waste their time playing chess, then some of those people will stop playing chess.

Good sportsmanship tries, in any sport, to avoid conduct which would make an opponent less willing to play in the future, in everything bar the result: it might even be defined as such.

[Simon Brown]

Couldn't agree more, Justin. I was taught to resign when you know your opponent knows he is going to win. Of course you have to be of a reasonable standard to understand when that is.

[Michael Flatt]

Geoff Chandler's view gets my vote.

With regard to chess etiquette and what is regarded as good or bad sportsmanship, there is no universal consensus and it is unlikely that there ever will be.

There is a recent post (on this forum) regarding the continuing use of adjudication which could be considered as relevant to this discussion.

Are players now suggesting that they want to introduce forced adjudication if their opponent refuses to resign and a player be prevented from exercising his or her prerogative of playing the game to a finish?

When does a won game became an irrevocably won game?

[Paul McKeown]

Of course you have to be of a reasonable standard to understand when that is.

I take it that you view yourself as being of that standard...

[Paul McKeown]

Well, let's make the point again: if people feel they are being made to waste their time playing chess, then some of those people will stop playing chess.

You can make the point again, but it doesn't stop you missing the point...