when should you resign a game?

[Simon Brown]

Hi Geoff

Going back a few posts, I expect my opponent to resign when he knows that I know what I am doing and he knows that I know how to win. I'm sure it's something to do with playing strength - for my last few years I rarely played anyone under about 180 so I expected them to recognise a completely lost position when they see one. I don't recall anyone having resigned against me when I wasn't expecting it, and on the occasions when I was expecting resignation and didn't get it, it was normally with extenuating circumstances - big blunder, time trouble, swindle etc.. Mate on the board - very rare.

On your footnote, I once resigned a game which was completely drawn - my opponent was threatening mate in 1 and I couldn't see an answer, despite it being fairly obvious to all watching. It was a king back move, allowing a rook to interpose the threatened mate, don't recall the exact position. I resigned by stopping the clock and shaking hands, whereupon my confused opponent told me he was just about to offer a draw! I think it was Middlesex against Surrey, about 1993/4 but I don't recall who I was playing, apart from that he was a promising youth, maybe 19/20 graded over 200. Maybe someone who has such records can enlighten me. And it was a French Defence, me black.

Simon

[James Toon]

The best advice I saw is that you shouldn't resign unless your position is hopeless. That tends to mean material down, no counterplay, and no chance of simplifying into a drawn ending. I would not insult my opponent by playing on in these circumstances.

However, depending on the grade of my opponent, I probably would play on in an ending which was difficult to win, such as K+B+N v K, or K+N+N v K+P, or K+R+B v K+N+N. This has never happened to me, in about 500 games going back 20 years.

[James Courtenay]

Isn't there a rule about not writing down in the last 5 minutes?

Yes there is. You are not required to keep a score of the game during the last 5 minutes of any time control that you are approaching. Your opponent is, unless he also has less than 5 minutes left. At the end of the time control (unless it is the end of the game, of course) you are required to bring your score of the game up-to-date, and your opponent should not hinder you in doing so (in practice he should offer you his score sheet, for you to use in your own time).*

I have seen it both ways, where someone gives up writing the moves down purely to blitz someone, and also where a member of my club had very little time left, but as his opponent had plenty, he restarted his clocks and insisted that he wrote down the moves - therefore preventing/making it much harder for him to be blitzed in a game where he managed to get a stalemate.

James.

*different rules apply for Fischer time controls, but even I am not geeky enough to know those off the top of my head! - something like 20 seconds a move or more and you've gotta keep writing the moves down regardless??

[Richard Bates]

However, depending on the grade of my opponent, I probably would play on in an ending which was difficult to win, such as K+B+N v K, or K+N+N v K+P, or K+R+B v K+N+N. This has never happened to me, in about 500 games going back 20 years.

That covers rather a wide range of scenarios! K+B+N v K is a trivial win, I have my doubts about whether i would win K+N+N v K+P (assuming even it's a winning version of the ending) and I don't think that K+R+B v K+N+N can even be considered a "winning ending" under the current laws of chess!

[Ian Lamb]

Hi James, Alex. Fischer time controls with Increments you must write all your moves down all the time during the game you can never stop to write the move down.

[Ian Kingston]

Article 8.4:

If a player has less than five minutes left on his clock at some stage in a period and does not have additional
time of 30 seconds or more added with each move, then for the remainder of the period he is not obliged to
meet the requirements of Article 8.1. Immediately after one flag has fallen the player must update his
scoresheet completely before moving a piece on the chessboard.

So with an increment of less than 30 seconds you don't have to write the moves down if you have less than five minutes remaining.

It's just possible that the increment could see a player's time oscillating above and below the five-minute mark, creating situations in which the player sometimes has to write down the moves and sometimes not. In practice, i think most players would just keep score anyway.

[Ian Lamb]

in long play chess i dont know of any tourny if incrments are being used that is less than 30 seconds during the game. if you could point any out then i be grateful. Where there are events such as these played in a slow time limit not rapidplay. i know 90 +30 second incrment is the fastest a time limit can be for it to be fide rated.

[Ian Kingston]

I don't know of any - just pointing out the possibility.

[James Courtenay]

Article 8.4:

If a player has less than five minutes left on his clock at some stage in a period and does not have additional
time of 30 seconds or more added with each move, then for the remainder of the period he is not obliged to
meet the requirements of Article 8.1. Immediately after one flag has fallen the player must update his
scoresheet completely before moving a piece on the chessboard.

So with an increment of less than 30 seconds you don't have to write the moves down if you have less than five minutes remaining.

It's just possible that the increment could see a player's time oscillating above and below the five-minute mark, creating situations in which the player sometimes has to write down the moves and sometimes not. In practice, i think most players would just keep score anyway.

Thanks Ian, I thought that was the case.

One minor point - it doesn't matter if you go above and below the 5 minute mark... As it says if at some stage during the period... therefore you can stop keeping score of the game until the end of that time period.

James.

[Ian Kingston]

I did wonder about the interpretation of 'at some stage'. I suppose the likelihood of someone being able to play so quickly that they accrue significantly more than a few seconds above the five-minute threshold is very low. So in effect, however one interprets that phrase, your view is the sensible and practical one.

[Matt Mackenzie]

K+B+N v K is a trivial win

To those who know how to do it, maybe - but there are several instances of titled players failing to get the full point!

I would always play on with a lone king in that situation (even against a GM) until it was clear they knew how to win it

[Sean Hewitt]

Seemingly never, or else this could never happen

[Event "A2Bmedialtd.com Uxbridge Int"]
[White ""]
[Black ""]
[Result "0-1"]
[PlyCount "94"]

1. f4 g6 2. Nf3 Bg7 3. g3 d5 4. Bg2 Nf6 5. O-O O-O 6. d3 Bf5 7. c3 Nbd7 8. Qe1
c6 9. Nd4 Qb6 10. Kh1 e6 11. e4 dxe4 12. dxe4 c5 13. Nb3 Bg4 14. h3 Bh5 15. e5
Nd5 16. g4 c4 17. Nd4 Bxg4 18. hxg4 Nc5 19. Na3 Qa6 20. b3 cxb3 21. axb3 Bh6
22. Bd2 Nd3 23. Qh4 Bxf4 24. Bxf4 N5xf4 25. Nc4 Nxg2 26. Kxg2 Nf4+ 27. Kh1 Qxa1
28. Rxa1 h5 29. gxh5 Nxh5 30. Rg1 Kh7 31. Nd6 b6 32. Ne4 Rh8 33. Qe7 Kg7 34.
Nxe6+ Kg8 35. Kg2 fxe6 36. Kf3 Rf8+ 37. Ke3 Nf4 38. Nf6+ Rxf6 39. Qe8+ Rf8 40.
Rxg6+ Kh7 41. Qd7+ Kxg6 42. Qxa7 Nd5+ 43. Kd3 Rh3+ 44. Kc4 Rxc3+ 45. Kb5 Rxb3+
46. Kc6 Rc8+ 47. Kd7 Rc7+ 0-1

[Matt Mackenzie]

I see why names have been omitted to protect the........er, innocent

[Geoff Chandler]

Hi Sean,

I've seen worse. A lot worse.

In the Scottish Championship in the 70's a player did not resign so his
opponent thought he would take the mickey and promote ALL his remaining pawns.
When he placed his 3rd. Queen on the board it was stalemate.

And James Turner resigned in a won position in the 2008 Edin Congress.
He actually had two Queen on the board.

The game is at the bottom of this Corner
http://www.chessedinburgh.co.uk/chandle ... handID=265

Glasgow Allegro mid 80's. I don't have all the details on hand.

I'm in a resignable position. I have one last trick and my oppnent walk into it.

He howls very loudly.
The Controller hurries across and tells him to be quiet.

He howls again and again.

"Stop the Clocks."

So my swindle from a lost position stopped a tournament whilst this lad.
was peacefully ushered away.

Let's see if this diagram showing thingy works?
The position is not 100% correct but the idea and bones are there.

Black played 1...Re7+ and I replied 2.Be6 Mate.

http://chessimg.com/1P5.png

Edit1: it appears to work!

[Scott Freeman]

This is an issue with which I can agree with most opinions expressed. Usually I will resign if and when I believe I am lost and my opponent is not going to fail to win (I do consider the standard of my opponent must play a part in such a decision). However, the only long play congress I ever played in (rather than ran) - back in 1997 - I managed to blunder a winning position and my opponent (a teenager) was eventually then left with King, Rook and 2 Pawns against my lone King. My King was trapped on the side of the board by his Rook, which was defended by one of the pawns. In other words, it was a position in which a player most anti resigning before checkmate would have resigned. Usually I would have done so but I was so cross with myself for throwing away the game that I played on, I think out of extreme sadistic anger at myself to make myself suffer facing the mate. Then I realised there was a trap and played for it. My opponent promoted his other pawn to a queen and stalemated me on the diagonal. THEN I felt awful, because I felt I probably should have resigned. Obviously I felt relieved as well. I won't tell you what he said at himself when he realised what he had done. It would have been checkmate next move had he turned it into a Rook.