Resignation Etiquette?

Help for a beginner? Last week I played a game and resigned when I was in a pretty weak position, maybe not an inevitable loss, but most likely,  the other plater called me out on chat for quitting too soon and said that I shouldn't quit so early.  Today I played a game, against an opponent with a rating higher than mine and was in a pretty weak position, we had played for 43 moves and I was down to a few pawns, my king, and a rook.  So I decided okay this time I will play it out and maybe learn something, even know I will lose.  Oh man, the other player starts in with how I have no respect for the game blah blah blah.  Just curious, is there a proper etiquette for resigning.

Generally, you resign a game when it is lost beyond a reasonable doubt.

Well, when it's clear that you'll lose you should resign in my opinion: it's very frustrating  to play silly endgames with 10 pieces up. But I must say, complaining to a person how he should/should not resign is just as stupid, there are as many etiquettes of resigning as there are chess players. Some find the whole concept of resigning stupid, while others resign when being one or two pawns down. Most of us do as I said above, resign when loss is clear (99%) sure, but then again, some continue a little longer, some give up earlier. And also the idea of not resigning at all is perfectly reasonable: yesterday I was in an endgame 6 pieces down, my opponen had an easy win, but then I managed to get a drawn position, and finally even beat my opponent. I would have resigned there in most of the days.

So in short: no, there is no proper etiquette for resigning. But still, if you play against me and are a ton of material down with absolutely no compensation, please resign  but if you see that I have a beautiful checkmate incoming, then you shouldn't

<Chbellomy> if there's any doubt - don't resign. Play on. 

If an opponent protests - calmly answer him that he's invited to checkmate you. This should settle the argument. 

I have my own pet peeve - it's an opponent who keeps on playing and playing in a patently drawn position where absolutely no ideas exist to turn it into an actual game - 

My opponent has 1:31 minutes, I have 1:03 - and he will flag me. 

Later he will tell me that I need to "improve my time management" (this is 3 min blitz). 

I always block such players, immediately. 

Chess is a sport. I play it to enjoy myself. I have no interest in arguing over this point, or in any counter-argument anybody would raise. 

If somebody does this to me OTB in an official BLITZ tournament, he's within his legal rights, of course - but I will never play with him afterwards in a friendly setting, offline or online. 

The only proper etiquette is to accept a person's willingness to resign or play on without question.

LOLED at this

Some people just like to complain. Keep playing. ;)

well, i have had every kind of troubles with this. to some people i have even apologized for not resigning and luckily it has happened to people either polite or were they really ok to find checkmate. if talking about resigning - many daily puzzles show situations where your opponent has material advantage, but you just find right moves and win. this is true enough, even I (my level is really-really low) have made some comebacks against stronger (and weaker) opponents.

there was a player who was clearly losing, but did not resign. he told me that i should pull myself together and checkmate. (i really did not see quicker way to do it and i am sure he did not either). so - as many answers before mine state - you will have problems anyhow. just do not worry about these people, they are hurt themselves.

there was a guy who started harassing me, because i played too badly and he thought i had too high rating. told him that real rating starts at 2000 and i am glad that he will be there soon. it was online game, my rating was around 1500.  just enjoy (and try not to be ass yourself)

For low-rated players, there is value, even in a lost postion, to see how better players finish them off.

ps. i do not start delaying with moves, i do not abandon games - this is really irritating. i do resign, when i feel this is right thing to do.

recently i have played only bullet and blitz, and one game i resigned just because i did not really understand position and material (playing from phone, bit unusual for me). i lost queen (blunder), but i had already won rook and knight and some pawns. thus i decided for future that in blitz games i will postpone any ideas concerning resignation as far as i can. just seconds later i saw how to continue.

also - playing blitz and bullet, specially bullet - it is kind of embarassing to keep playing when really down with material, but up on time (sometimes i do resign in these positions). i have observed good players playing on time and actually i think it is ok. it is one part of rules setting - you may lose almost everything, but until you have one pawn and king - you can win on time.

If you know how to finish if you were on the other side, and you feel your opponent also knows it, you can resign.  Otherwise, continue to play and learn. 

Sorry,.....i have dyslexia and i sometimes read things wrong, i have deleted the comment......yes i am from England. 

There is no problem in forcing your opponent to prove he knows how to win a "won game."

Tell him to shut his entitled yapper.

Ask the opponent before the game starts what they consider reasonable, then you will not disappoint them. Otherwise do your own thing.

I always have chat disabled so it's kind of hard for my opponents to complain about anything.

disabling chat is the oldest trick in the book!