People who don't resign

I don't know about you guys, but it seems my opponents NEVER resign.  Last game, I had 2 passed pawns that he could not stop to only a king with a minute left.  How is that not resignable?  I am 1900 OTB and 1500 blitz.  Give me some credit opps!

http://www.chess.com/livechess/game?id=649239604

why resign if you can still wish for stalemate if your opponent blunders.. that's why.

Probably because it was a 3-minute time control.

I am under the impression in my bullet games that a lot of players don't know their endgames well enough to win quickly; your opponent probably was banking on this.

2 passed pawns vs nothing with a min left is plenty

There are a few reasons for this, win on time, don´t take the opponent seriously and so on.Or even don´t know that it is lost in lower sections.

In blitzgames this is normal and understandable.

BUT promoting to a Knight just for fun knowing being to weak to promote the second pawn to a Bishop is unhonorable.

So your opponent did nothing wrong to play on a timewin.

I would never play a game against you even if you would be the last chessplayer on earth, this Knight would be like playing against a 5 year old kid(talented).

you missed to win a minorpiece on move 14 and would have lost your queen on move 16.

So pls don´t tell us you are a 1900 OTB(= over the board, 120 minutes/40 moves or equal timecontroll) player in RL.

Your chess.com rating is 1900+, try to archieve this in RL without databases, books and a short check by your engine.

To be honest I think you are cheating in online chess, your other Ratings are to low.

The knight promote was a misclick.  I suck at blitz.  Trying to become better.  I don't make a lot of mistakes when I have the time to think

Weak players don't resign yet, they play the game until the end. I don't know why, but it is true for everyone. Or in blitz game they may hope that you lose on time. A good way against them is to slow your win, promote your pawns to knights and bishops and mate them with those, they will learn that they should resign. Maybe it sounds rude, maybe it is, but anyway, if they don't resign make them resign. Although not resigning is much more annoying in OTB games.

"Your chess.com rating is 1900+, try to archieve this in RL without databases, books and a short check by your engine.

To be honest I think you are cheating in online chess, your other Ratings are to low."

1900 USCF by the way isn't that much, USCF ratings are about 100 poinst higher than FIDE ratings. But you can use databases, engines, and books to prepare for the game in OTB as well, so it was stupid what you wrote :D

And you should be knowing that online ratings are higher than normal ratings in chess.com as well.
Because you are a weak player it does not mean that someone is cheating who has much higher rating than you have. 

Sometimes you want to stalemate... and sometimes your opponent made rude and/or childish comments in the chat during the game so you just want to tie him up as long as possible out of spite 

One should resign if one's position on the board is hopeless and the opponent has time to exploit the situation.To force your opponent to play to the end,when one has no reasonable chance for a draw or stalemate is poor sportsmanship,and speaks volumes about the player who refuses to resign.This rule only applies if one has truely lost,not if one has any form of counter-chances.

If I'm a piece or two down or I blunder my queen, I won't resign, because I feel the practice of trying to fight out of the difficult positions that I'm going to be in put in makes me a better player and forces me to be creative.  Even if the position seems bleak, trying to find any kind of combination that could help me out is good for my tactical development and long-term thinking ability.

In cases where the opponent has a clear passed pawn that is unstoppable, or I just have a king left or something really ridiculous and hopeless that is a waste of everybody's time, I will always resign.  It's not about winning and losing for me.

Good post montemaur.You second paragraph is what I was refering to.I think that many people have a fundamental misunderstanding about this topic and mistake "losing" for "lost"; as long as one has counter-chances one plays on,one resigns when one has zero counter-chances,for at that point the game can be reasonably called hopeless.

"Never give in, never give in, never, never, never, never—in nothing, great or small, large or petty—never give in except to convictions of honour and good sense."
--WINSTON CHURCHILL 1941

In the context of this thread,whether you "give in " or not...the outcome is already decided.So what purpose is served by not resigning?

humans 1981...interesting post.Greg is a jerk for his whimiscal promotion,yet it's alright for his opponent to waste everyone's time with  his utterly hopeless defense.Refusing to resign in such positions is simply insulting to the player who is winning...it's the equivalent of saying,"even with such a huge material advantage you are too much of an idiot to mate me."

@csalami10

You really think he is better than me? Look at his scores and the average rating of his opponents:

Live-Schach - Blitz

1409

Live-Schach - Standard

1398

Online-Schach

1960

Taktik

1475

Schach-Mentor

1658

against mine:

Live-Schach - Blitz

1828

Online-Schach

1768

Taktik

2090

Schach-Mentor

1766

And that is a more balanced skillset for chessplayers, as his one peak.

And I am nearly a 2k Fide OTB player (1981), are you? 

Have fun preparing against every opening you could encounter in an OTB game at home.

I don´t think you have prepared something for this:

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.c4

So I think it was stupid.

Good chessplayers are good in tactics, bad players aren´t.

So my OTB rating is higher and more worth but I am weaker than him?

@badger-song:

He already did in the middlegame 2 "blunders", his opponent didn´t punish him for that, maybe he realized it later, that there was a queen hanging.

This happens sometimes to me when i am playing to fast.

I trained friends of mine, i took a rook+King against a King endgame, and they didn´t managed to mate me, because they didn´t know the patterns.

When there are more than a Queen or Rook is on the board i would never surrrender in a 3 minute Blitzgame, where both have at this time maybe 5 seconds left.

I would run arround his pawns, it doesn´t matter if he could have mate me in one , when his time is over.

You will never draw or win a lost game. Keep playing and you have the change to win or draw a lost game on time.

Or even people who resign on move 20, because they lost a pawn somewhere, how should they ever get better.

Normally for a pawn you get a halfopened file, or a tempo which needs your opponent to take the pawn.

R+B, against R are mostly drawish, they will never elarn this if they resign in the midlegame.

After they learned this to not resign in middlegame, they have no practice how to play this kind of endgame, and they will lose them also latter.

Resigning a game is a more waste of time(both players).

You are in a winning position, your opponents always resigns. Do you think you have archieved the technique you need to win this winning position, when your opponent always resign?

I had games where I was ahead 2 pawns, the opponent didn´t resign and drew it in the endgame(As youthplayer) :(

I also drew games being two pawns behind :)

You will learn nearly nothing from resigning games!

Many chessplayers here do not resign  and continue struggle up to checkmate. Even playing online chess! For me it looks like to be unrespectful towards their partners. Once my partner did not resign some days having to get checmate in one! Then I resigned :)

I fear I did a wrong act.

Ughhh, look, I resign when I get down to the point where I'm losing so bad I don't think I can come back or I've lost the will to continue in the game, but....what should it matter to the person winning if the losing player doesn't resign, just beat them then!  Geez, they probably aren't insulting you're intelligence, but even if they are then beating them is the best way to shut them up.  Really a stupid thing for a person to get upset over.

"You will learn nearly nothing from resigning games."

Yes indeed,you'll certainly miss out on all those oppertunities to steal victory from the jaws of defeat,gain the point,and stun your opponents with the wizardry of your "Lone-King-Mate";wherein,your lone king,your sole surviving piece,against an armada of material still manages somehow to achieve checkmate.

@badger_song:

okay it is maybe better to lose on time in a lost position or some stuff like this.

So where is the point you will resign?

1Pawn, 2P, 3P, 4P, Exchange, Minorpiece, a Rook I don´t know.

If I would be behind 3 Pawns and behind in time, with no compensassion!!!,like pieceactivity i would resign.

If i am ahead in time, like 30 seconds in a blitz game, this would be enough compensation for me to keep on playing.

If you would answer this with yes, take a look at this game

http://www.chess.com/livechess/game?id=649415014

Any questions?

Learn to live with it.  Saves you lots of keystrokes too.  Just a hint.

Also, consider playing with a 5 second bonus, and practice reaching the end of the game on the board, instead of on the clock.

Simple enough ??