when should you resign a game?

[Ian Lamb]

just a view when should you resign a game is there a point where it becomes a joke when you dont resign what your view?

[Geoff Chandler]

There is nothing in the rules to say you must resign. If a player wants to
play on and on till they are mated then so be it.

I personally do not have a problem with this. I don't think it's bad manners
or bad sportsmanship.

When faced with a defeat you often have a crowd of vultures around the board
wanting to witness the kill.
Sometimes the player is simply waiting for a few spectators to go away so
they can resign 'in peace'.

I resign when all is doomed. If it's a nice mating combination I've walked into
then I will allow it. I get disapointed when they resign after I've pulled one my
specials out the bag and I'm not allowed the pleasure of playing the mate.

[Alex Holowczak]

I never resign, on principle. I've played so many games where a clearly won game for my opponent went wrong because they rushed it and made a mistake (and regrettably, vice versa). But then again, my standard is such that endgame disasters happen sometimes. For beginners though, I think that sort of thing is useful, as it helps teach you to defend. At the very worst, you get to see how your opponent finishes you off.

I once drew a game against someone graded ~ 100 which was K, B, N & 2P v K & B. I sacked the B for the 2P, and my opponent suddenly realised he didn't know how to mate with K, B & N.

[JustinHorton]

I think there is a question of sportsmanship here, but it's pretty hard to pin down exactly.

[Ian Lamb]

yes when it become insulting to an oppnent?

[Geoff Chandler]

I cannot see why it should be an insult. You should not let anything
your opponent plays upset you. He is perfectly within his rights to play on.

Maybe he wanted to play the longest game in the tournament.

Maybe he was asked to play on by one of the boffins because if he stopped his game
the rest of the live games would crash.

Perhaps he did not feel like resigning.

Forget it - move on: (move on gedditt?)

[Simon Brown]

Sorry Geoff, I totally disagree. Playing on to mate is disrespectful - if your opponent has outplayed you, how can you expect him/her to make a mistake in the easiest part of the game? In my playing career - 30+ years - I haven't done that to anyone thanks to my father teaching me at an early stage when resignation is appropriate. Nor has anyone done it to me.

That said, I coach kids aged up to about 13, of a pretty high standard, and the hardest lesson is when they should resign. But the ones who get it always seem to be the better players.....

[Sebastian Stone]

Down material?
This depends on grading and position over the board.
No counterplay?
No drawing chances?

Resign.

[Geoff Chandler]

Hi Simon,

I'm not saying you should play on in a totally lost positiion but when
an opponent does you should not look upon at as a sign of disrespect
or ill manners.

If you let a minor detail like that upset you then the chances are you
may blow it trying to finish off the game too quick. I've seen it happen.

And at what part of the game do you decide when your opponent should resign?

Your opponents choice of moves and decisions has nothing to do with you.
Your job is to react to what he plays on the board and if he chooses to play
on when you think he should he resign then you will play on as well.

What happens after the game is up to you but until FIDE draws up a list of
positions that players MUST resign then a player is perfectly within his rights to play on.

The group of kids/adults I teach I always advise to resign if there is no hope.
For the simple reason they will learn a valuable lesson from the defeat and
a sure way of your opponent NOT going over the game with you is to drag out
a totally lost position.

Footnote:
The history of the game is littered with players resigning in won positions.
Three times it has happened to me, twice OTB and once in postal play!
Touch wood I've not done it (yet).

[JustinHorton]

I think people are actually arguing the same case here from different directions: nobody denies that a player has a right to play on until mate if they choose, but similarly nobody says it's appropriate to do so.

I think everybody agrees that there's a point beyond which you probably shouldn't play on, but of course defining where that point is is not really possible. Possibly the best we can do is to describe it - perhaps "the point beyond which you are knowingly wasting the opponent's time by playing on"?

[Brian Valentine]

My position on this issue is similar but with a nuance. I will resign when it is clear that my opponent knows how to win the game. (However if I allow them to start a short forced mating sequence I will let them complete it).

[Mick Norris]

I once resigned in a won position, so I've tried not to resign much since

I've had players miss a mate in one and then lose to me

Last week, I had R+B+4 Pawns v R+N, my opponent resigned only when I had won the knight, then later the rook and it was mate in 6 - I was more irritated with the fact that it was past move 60 and he had stopped recording the moves at move 10 for some reason

I think I've won or drawn about 15 games from losing positions in the last 18 months, it is about the only part of chess I'm good at!

[Ian Lamb]

Mick you should of told him he must record the moves its part of the game he needs to be told for next time it occurs.otherwise he never learn and always do this.especailly if its move 10 and the game just started ok if he got just 5 min left on his clock then we know that he does not have to write the moves down.

[Alex Holowczak]

Mick you should of told him he must record the moves its part of the game he needs to be told for next time it occurs.otherwise he never learn and always do this.

To that end, at the Terafinal a few years ago, a player on a nearby board suddenly stopped writing moves down. He had about 5 minutes to go before a time control, so I thought it was justified. Wasn't really paying attention. Then, his opponent said, "Don't you need to write the moves down?" Pause as everyone looked around. His opponent repeated, "You can't just stop writing the moves down." Then he looked up and said "I can stop writing down whenever I like." His opponent didn't point it out for a third time.

[Graham Borrowdale]

In GM games players often resign simple technical endings, eg R+P v R with the king cut off by 2 files or whatever, where the win is straightforward (to them) according to the book. However, at much very lower levels, such as mine, opponents do not resign such positions, because they need me to demonstrate that I know how to win, which I usually fail to do. So I agree with Brian, I would resign when happy that the opponent knows how to win the position.