@petri999 this guy is 15. We play in a high school club together. I am the only somewhat strong player in the group, I'm only involved because I think it's great to teach others.
@Tucktuck24
Your #20 post about sums up what I was going to offer.I was taught by my father that not to resign against a stronger opponent when you have tried your best, and failed, to find away out is implying that your opponent is an idiot and will eventually blunder if you just wait long enough.
In most of the OTB tournys I played in (as a Junior )there was the ability to call in a scrutineer to call a resignation in these circumstances.The concept of respecting opponents was actively encouraged.BTW these were always non time-control games.
Your #20 post about sums up what I was going to offer.I was taught by my father that not to resign against a stronger opponent when you have tried your best, and failed, to find away out is implying that your opponent is an idiot and will eventually blunder if you just wait long enough.
In most of the OTB tournys I played in (as a Junior )there was the ability to call in a scrutineer to call a resignation in these circumstances.The concept of respecting opponents was actively encouraged.BTW these were always non time-control games.
@bunyip That scrutineer concept sounds interesting. I don't like the idea of forced resignation except maybe in extreme cases such as an 800+ rating gap or when the winning player is rated over 2000. I think in those sorts of scenarios, the game is clearly over. But yeah, I am probably going to be teaching at a high school chess club this year and etiquette is one of the first things I'm planning on bringing up, right after the rules and the "parts of the game" lesson.
@Chuck_Fess:
Shh, don't tell Americans the truth else they may no longer believe that the USA is a great country.
Next you're going to expose the the Rosa Parks incident was stages and Claudette Colvin failed to perform this simple task.
Actually, the Alamo was a last moment substitution for a suicide reference, and I only thought of the legend instead of the reality. I was wrong.
Shh, don't tell Americans the truth else they may no longer believe that the USA is a great country.
Next you're going to expose the the Rosa Parks incident was stages and Claudette Colvin failed to perform this simple task.
Actually, the Alamo was a last moment substitution for a suicide reference, and I only thought of the legend instead of the reality. I was wrong.
"I was taught by my father that not to resign against a stronger opponent when you have tried your best, and failed, to find away out is implying that your opponent is an idiot and will eventually blunder if you just wait long enough."
Playing chess is inherently implying your opponent is an idiot and will eventually blunder, it is the only way to win. If it's not, that means chess is a won game from the beginning for one of the sides, any proof of that would be great.
You might say that the sort of mistake between two GMs couldn't be called a "blunder", but if we accept that a mistake is necessary, and that mistake is what caused a certain GM to lose, then it is only not called a blunder because of our lack of computing prowess. An inability to identify the mistake is not the same as it not existing, unless chess is won from the beginning position.
If a person cannot handle the suggestion that they might make a mistake, they are playing the wrong game.
Playing chess is inherently implying your opponent is an idiot and will eventually blunder, it is the only way to win. If it's not, that means chess is a won game from the beginning for one of the sides, any proof of that would be great.
You might say that the sort of mistake between two GMs couldn't be called a "blunder", but if we accept that a mistake is necessary, and that mistake is what caused a certain GM to lose, then it is only not called a blunder because of our lack of computing prowess. An inability to identify the mistake is not the same as it not existing, unless chess is won from the beginning position.
If a person cannot handle the suggestion that they might make a mistake, they are playing the wrong game.
@jonesmh
I'm all for bashing the American government, it's awful. That said, it was the Mexican army that carried out the massacre at the Alamo.
The US government did opt not to intervene, though.
I was not being too critical of you with my comment though, I had to look it up after your comment to make sure I remembered correctly. The 1840s were a bit before my time too.
I'm all for bashing the American government, it's awful. That said, it was the Mexican army that carried out the massacre at the Alamo.
The US government did opt not to intervene, though.
I was not being too critical of you with my comment though, I had to look it up after your comment to make sure I remembered correctly. The 1840s were a bit before my time too.
@Tucktuck24 If one of the first things you'll teach about chess is when to resign, because otherwise you're just wasting your opponents time, you'll take away a lot of the fun. It's a horribly depressing way to start and will take away a lot of the excitement. But besides that, it's just wrong. New players should never resign. Often they will play opponents who will blunder away a victory and even if that doesn't happen, seeing how their opponent is checkmating them can be a very instructive moment.
You're turning a lot of their draws and even wins into losses, taking away excitement for the game, and taking away a lot of instructive endgames. All this so they'll save you some time now and then?
You're turning a lot of their draws and even wins into losses, taking away excitement for the game, and taking away a lot of instructive endgames. All this so they'll save you some time now and then?
Im one of those players that never resign, even in clearly losing games. If my opponent wants a win, they will have to prove they can mate me, and maybe I'll learn something along the way. I'm ex military and still hold the never give up mentality, so I'll play on in any situation, who knows, maybe they'll blunder and I'll get a draw out of it. If practicing mating sequences bothers you, try to mate him as quickly as possible, or make the game more challenging and play with a handicap. I'm only a 1200 player, but play with coworkers that sould be rated sub 1000s, and typically play against them with no Queen. It makes it more challenging and more exciting.
I agree. You never know. If they blunder, you could get yourself a draw.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.