When do we resign? This is certainly an interesting question. Yesterday in a tournament, I was clearly winning with two pawns, one on e6 and clearly about to promote, yet my opponent didn't resign and I hung mate in one. Truly one of the most terrible experiences. (well at least I got to practice my new opening prep and in all fairness I had done the same exact thing to one of my opponents the past week) Anyways, I was definitely not feeling in a good mood and therefore proceeded to resign in the next game too, as I thought that mate was impossible to prevent when in reality I had a defensive resource, that I might have seen had I not been out of it. I think that I usually resign based on the context, who the opponent is, and how I've been doing that day. If I already have a few losses and I'm tired, I might just resign and quit the tournament for the day, but in winning situations when I am close to a prize, I will keep fighting for a possible defensive resources or perpetual check. The situation really matters when it comes to how and when I resign.
Suggesting it is best for your score to never resign is a common misconception. I used to believe this but (for humans) it only is true if your game is effectively the last one you will ever play.
1. Playing on without real chance of winning still consumes energy and focus. Especially in a tournament this can lead to worse results in future games.
2. If you ever encounter the same opponent again, eapecially face to face they are likely to also not resign in a mirrored position. Making point 1 even worse.
1. Playing on without real chance of winning still consumes energy and focus. Especially in a tournament this can lead to worse results in future games.
2. If you ever encounter the same opponent again, eapecially face to face they are likely to also not resign in a mirrored position. Making point 1 even worse.
@gambitzoid said in #9:
> it's just a waste of time to play certain games to their end. the evaluator in your head say the best move you can find leaves you at -5, so what's the point?
Sometimes the position is complicated enough to be not that far from finding some perpetual check, stalemate or even a lucky checkmate (that's why winning side loves simplifying), especially in faster time controls...
> it's just a waste of time to play certain games to their end. the evaluator in your head say the best move you can find leaves you at -5, so what's the point?
Sometimes the position is complicated enough to be not that far from finding some perpetual check, stalemate or even a lucky checkmate (that's why winning side loves simplifying), especially in faster time controls...
I decided to let an opponent play to checkmate the other day because his attack had been quite beautiful and I felt it deserved to be played to its conclusion. I thought that was a sign of respect for the game he had just played. Turns out it properly upset him, to the point he interjected to angrily to 'show' me the mate on my move, thinking I hadn't seen it, shouting 'it's obvious'! Go figure.
@juancruzariasTDF said in #19:
> @aerosol2505 ...Re8 is a very cool idea.
>
> I remember reading another lichess post that went into the statistics of winning rates as a function of advantage (by rating). Sadly can't find it now.
I am unsure, do you mean the post that also discusses how "accuracy" is determined here? As it punishes players more the more the winning advantage is being let slipped (using an exponential fit onto the centipawn mechanic)
See: lichess.org/page/accuracy
Edit: Probably have misread as i have read "as a function of advantage (by centipawn rating)" somehow, but maybe this still helps. Let it depend on rating would probably more interesting though
> @aerosol2505 ...Re8 is a very cool idea.
>
> I remember reading another lichess post that went into the statistics of winning rates as a function of advantage (by rating). Sadly can't find it now.
I am unsure, do you mean the post that also discusses how "accuracy" is determined here? As it punishes players more the more the winning advantage is being let slipped (using an exponential fit onto the centipawn mechanic)
See: lichess.org/page/accuracy
Edit: Probably have misread as i have read "as a function of advantage (by centipawn rating)" somehow, but maybe this still helps. Let it depend on rating would probably more interesting though
@AGX111, so basically you got insulted for showing respect, cool...
In a recent game, I was badly losing but somehow I found a way to draw by triple repetition, just to see opponent resign and call me "idiot".
I guess they didn't know the rule and thought we were doomed to play eternally Rook and King back and forth...
In a recent game, I was badly losing but somehow I found a way to draw by triple repetition, just to see opponent resign and call me "idiot".
I guess they didn't know the rule and thought we were doomed to play eternally Rook and King back and forth...
@OctoPinky brilliant. I hope you waited until the result was logged and then explained it to them...
Hey, my friend tried to make 2 accounts to play each other.
@AGX111 said in #27:
> @OctoPinky brilliant. I hope you waited until the result was logged and then explained it to them...
No way, that's my secret weapon... Just in case we get paired again.
> @OctoPinky brilliant. I hope you waited until the result was logged and then explained it to them...
No way, that's my secret weapon... Just in case we get paired again.
@OctoPinky that's so awesome