Author: Louis Fagliano
Date: 07:41:38 10/09/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 09, 2002 at 10:24:10, Brian Thomas wrote: >Interesting topic brought up recently among co-workers (we are casual chess >players only); interested here in opinions/thoughts, not looking to start a >debate and not meant as a troll! > >We've noticed that resigning is almost always considered acceptable in Chess. >Yet, in most sports or competition, this is not so. In most other competitions >(all that I can think of, but I may be missing some) even in the face of certain >defeat it is considered polite and perhaps "honorable" to finish the match. > >Opinions? > >Brian Resigning is acceptable in chess because there are no random factors (i.e., dice rolls or cards that are drawn) that could luckily or miraculously turn a sure defeat into a victory. In backgammon, for instance, when it's time for both players to bear off, someone way behind could get a lucky series of doubles and come from behind in what looked like a sure loss to win. In chess you can make any legal move you want, and if the player with the advantage has a forced checkmate and sees it or knows the technique to force that checkmate, then there is nothing to stop him from doing so. (There are no dice rolls or cards to be drawn.) Thus resigning is a way for the losing player to avoid the dismal, hopeless interval that occurs before checkmate and also to respect the player who is winning by conceding that he is smart enough to know how to finish the game. There is luck in chess, of course, but that comes from when you make bad moves and your opponent doesn't see that they are bad and lets you off the hook, but that kind of luck is not the same as something that results in random factors (dice rolls or cards that are drawn, again) going your way.
This page took 0.01 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.