Hey, OP! Did your game end in a stalemate? Did you encounter a weird pawn move? Are you trying to move a piece and it's not going? We have just the resource for you! The [Chess Beginners Wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/chessbeginners/wiki/index/) is the perfect place to check out answers to these questions and more!
The moderator team of r/chessbeginners wishes to remind everyone of the community rules. **Posting spam, being a troll, and posting memes are not allowed.** We encourage everyone to report these kinds of posts so they can be dealt with. Thank you!
Let's do our utmost to be kind in our replies and comments. Some people here just want to learn chess and have virtually no idea about certain chess concepts.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/chessbeginners) if you have any questions or concerns.*
First they wanted to make a lot of queens because it's fun the first time you do it, then they were like "I'll just use the rooks, I don't want them to think I needed all these queens" and they were sloppy about the impact those queens have.
I think I only found 17 but I kept losing track of which ones I counted
EDIT: I think I missed 4 mates that the rook on c6 can deliver by going to c1-4
Beginners don’t often get the board clear with lots of pawns left. They rarely get that level of control, so sometimes going for the fast win once you gain control of the board seems like it lessens the excitement. So playing around with an open board in a real game is more fun than winning. It’s like taking a trick shot when you aren’t the best. A normal shot would be better overall when it comes to winning, but the trick shot doesn’t come often to some so they have fun with it. I agree in a game like chess it seems especially stupid or pointless, but it just follows normal behaviours and shows they care about chess to learn to play but aren’t focused on becoming the best they can be yet.
Seriously - I never resign but did today when someone started marching their remaining 3 pawns across the board while I just had a king to move between 2 spaces. They already had 2 rooks and a promoted queen..
Ironically the moment I see them getting a bunch of queens I’ll try to see if I can get a stalemate. So many times they’re so focused on getting 5 queens that they don’t notice that they either 1) have no time, or 2) the more likely one, that promoting their queens ends in stalemate.
There’s a difference between using the time controls, vs deliberately wasting your opponent’s time.
If you think for each move and then play to win etc then that’s fine, but if you just run the clock down then you can be banned for being unsporting
The exact situation and how often you do it will affect things - eg if you run the clock down every time your opponent has a forced mate, you’ll be banned much faster than if you slow play a clearly losing position but do continue to play
So because you are too stubborn to resign and accept defeat, and the opponent equally decides to BM by promoting all their pawns, you then decide to waste time by actually doing something ban worthy (stalling)? That’s really dumb, and petty. It’s just a game, resigning and losing a few ELO isn’t the end of the world
But are they really wasting more time than the person who has mate in one or two moves and refuses to do it because they’ve been dIsReSpEcTeD? I’d rather earn a checkmate than be given a resignation.
Mate me or don’t, but I don’t owe you anything in addition to having lost.
Fair, but your opponents don't owe you a swift defeat either. I do that sometimes because it's fun to me, not a waste of time. I don't mind being on the receiving end either. If you're not having fun, resign. Or would you rather actually waste time by stalling because you've been dIsReSpEcTeD by your opponent having a bit of fun?
Yes. If you won’t resign, you shouldn’t be surprised if your opponent will equally disrespect you back. Both are bad sportsmanship, but stalling is another level of petty and actually can get you banned. If you stall because you don’t want to resign, then you shouldn’t be playing chess. Go take a breather, it’s a game.
>But are they really wasting more time
Yes. you are 100% wasting more time by refusing to play out moves that can be made over the course of 1 or 2 minutes while you wait for your 10 minute clock to run out
Or you can swallow your ego and resign.
Mating in whatever way you want isn't toxic since the other guy can resign whenever they want to, wasting someone's time because they hurt your ego is.
Running your king on a clearly lost game is equivalent to getting multiple queens on a clearly won game.
I say, it’s all part of the game. If the winner wants to end it now, they can mate them in a few moves (if that many). If the loser wants to end it now, they can resign.
or how about the opponent swallows his ego and just checkmates? purposefully wasting time is just as toxic.
in such a situation, i will try my luck and hope he screws up with a stalemate or runs out of time. why? because i can.
It doesn't waste anyone's time to promote all your pawns. Bored? Just resign.
It doesn't waste anyone's time to keep playing your forced moves, expecting your opponent to scew up and stalemate. Bored? Just checkmate.
It does however waste both players' time if the losing side decides to just wait until their time runs off. That's the "hurt ego" part of my argument.
Except it's not a hurt ego. I wouldn't waste my time, as picture above shows that there's still a point in it for me, and I'd accept the offer.
Opponent could offer a draw if his intention is to give me a point, so he ultimately would waste his own time. That's the point you're not getting. Glad to help you out.
Thanks for proving my point. Opponent doesn't win if he refuses to checkmate. That's the opposite of winning the game. And dumb too.
Want to win the game and get credit for your win? Checkmate. It's that easy really.
I am actually shocked that there are more people on this subreddit that would take the side of the person stalling. In any other community the majority of people would say the person afk'ing is a dick. It seems like chess players have the biggest egos out of any community
Lmao. If you’re intentionally refusing to checkmate and instead just making queens, then you deserve that draw. I’m not going to resign because it’s what you want.
If someone fucks up trying to get 6 queens and stalemates, yeah they deserved to get the stalemate.
If someone just plays their forced moves until their opponent gets however many queens expecting a stalemate, sure it's fine.
If someone keeps their opponent hostage in a game by waiting, they're butthurt.
It’s not flexing, it’s bm’ing. Not resigning when you only have a king left is equally just as bad, since you’re basically saying “I don’t think you’re good enough to not stalemate.” Tit for tat, if the opponent chooses to promote pawns cause you won’t resign, don’t throw a hissy fit.
>Or you can swallow your ego and mate
>
>Making moves until the game ends without resigning isn’t toxic since the other guy can just mate if they want to win, wasting someone’s time to stroke your own ego is.
Thanks for playing
Whether they're promoting all their pawns to stroke their ego or for fun is irrelevant because if you're bored you can always get out of the situation by resigning. However if the losing side decides to just wait until their time runs out that's toxic since the winning side now has to wait with them.
It is really not that hard to understand this.
“I’m allowed to waste their time, but they’re not allowed to waste my time!”
Oh but they can just resign if they want, so can you. Or just be a decent player and end the game if you’ve clearly won.
>so can you
Yeah people should just resign games they won because their opponent is trying to waste their time.
Don't be dense, if someone wants to promote pawns they want to promote pawns. If someone doesn't want to resign, they don't want to resign. These are both cool since they don't force anyone to spend any more time than they're willing to spend.
If you wait for your time to run out because you lost, you're just compensating for your hurt ego by "taking control".
Just like you’re “taking control” by doing useless things on an already decided game. Both things are equally bad.
Some people will resign, some people won’t, but don’t act like them not resigning is somehow worse than you not ending the game cause you’re not done with the power trip
I don't take control of anything since I don't promote all my pawns but even if I did my opponent would have the choice to either keep playing or resign.
I just said not resigning is not a bad thing, it is cool if you keep playing expecting your opponent to screw up and stalemate.
Not resigning is not the same thing as sitting on your hands, waiting for your time to run out. That's just resigning, but childishly.
Apparently some people are not amused when you refuse to resign, seeing it as in you trying to waste their precious time. So they proceed to play the uno reverse card, only to realize that they play chess and not uno and ultimately end up wasting their own time. Just my kind of humor.
i foresee this getting downvoted but if you are in a position where you’ve got no pieces and they have a ladder mate you could just resign out of respect for them outplaying you tbf, same reason people otb resign in dead lost positions to avoid wasting both player’s time. the winner’s already clear.
Respect? LOL
If my opponent throws a tantrum because i refuse to resign in a casual game, while he could just easily end the game on his own within a few seconds, then he definetly doesn't earn my "respect".
And as the picture above shows, the winner is not clear at all. Even if this is faked, this definetly happens often enough.
You should keep playing, chances are they stalemate and just get 1 point instead of beating you and boosting their Elo. And it will frustrate them infinitely more that they stalemated a game 4 queens and 2 rooks up.
I do that to annoy people who don’t resign. If you want to waste my time by not resigning a clearly lost position, I’m going to waste yours right back.
Once you’re above 1300 or so, you really shouldn’t be getting a stalemate in a winning end game. I understand lower Elo players playing on, but once you reach a certain point, it just becomes disrespectful.
Wow, so you actually exist. Good to know. Living in a world where trying your best is somehow disrespectful while griefing is fine, what a time be alive.
I play 30 minute games, and players can easily burn through 5-10 minutes finding moves to prolong a clearly losing position. I find it disrespectful. Most players of an intermediate level or higher would agree.
Couple of things:
1) There are definitely skills that you can develop when playing a clearly lost or clearly won game. People play long time constraints so they can think through their moves carefully. So what if they're losing? It's rude if they're just wasting time, or take 3 minutes to make their only legal move before M1, but not if they're actively trying to win or draw.
2) There are, occasionally, ways to force stalemate or perpetual check or repetition. Seeing those, too, is a useful skill to develop, even at high levels.
3) If you're upset that they're wasting your time, why not just offer a draw or resign? You'd rather waste time on a boring game than lose rating, which is fair - but then you can't fault those players for pointlessly trying to salvage a draw and their rating, either. You have the option of playing daily or playing a bot or going on your phone or just offering a draw and starting a new game, rather than demanding that other players play exactly the way you want.
Playing chess on a chess website is not disrespectful IMO
People in this sub encourage that kind of behavior, it’s no surprise you’re being downvoted. I think the bar is even lower, 800+ ELO it’s uncommon to stalemate unless you’re messing around. They’re just petty and making excuses
Giving your best by all costs against an opponent is a good sportsmanship. That's called respecting your opponent. And if you're not a GM yourself you can only predict obvious and close mates. At this point you should let your opponent have this checkmate pop up. Just look at the evaluations after your opponents or you resign? I'm 14h, and in 25% more or less cases my opponents resign cause they think they're losing but the eval says that's me who is done.
King walking is not giving it your best, it’s hanging on to a tiny sliver of hope while simultaneously saying to the opponent “you suck, I think you might stalemate so I won’t resign.” We’re talking about completely lost positions, such as this post where it’s 1 king vs. multiple pawns and 2 rooks.
OP’s post in particular seems to be stalemate on purpose, otherwise it has to be a very very low rated game.
If you have Two Rooks vs your opponent's king and you are promoting pawns than you deserve to have your time wasted or your opponent playing king moves in hope of getting a stalemate.
I would get if you were a beginner with Rook, King and pawn who doesn't know how to checkmate with king and rook but if you have two rooks or a rook and a queen and still wanna push pawn and risk a stalemate than that's completely on you.
If you have no pieces left and your opponent has more than enough to checkmate you and you still won’t resign, you deserve to be embarrassed with a 5 queen checkmate. You all just love to make excuses on this subreddit to try and squeeze a stalemate, which is just petty and bad sportsmanship.
>If you have no pieces left and your opponent has more than enough to checkmate you and you still won’t resign
This is a pointless debate. I would just say why would I resign when the opponent is busy wasting his own time promoting his pawns instead of checkmating and winning.
Then you would say that you are promoting the pawns because the opponent is wasting your time by not resigning.
Let me ask you one thing, What is your actual problem with people playing till checkmate ? Is it wasted time ? Then just checkmate your opponent. Simple as that.
If you wanna 'rub it in' by promoting your pawns, you risk a stalemate. You really don't need 3 queens on top of your two rooks to checkmate, if you still wanna do it and end up drawing coz of stalemate, that's completely on you.
I would never ever EVER resign if an opponent is pushing pawn when there is a mate in 3 position. i don't care what people like you think is 'petty' or 'bad sportsmanship', I don't care if I end up getting mated with 5 queens, The opponent can celebrate that W. But If there is a chance to get a result out of that position, I will always go for it.
Don't like it ? Too bad. No one gives an F.
Oopsi, Got a Stalemate ? Should have just checkmated when you had a chance.
And since you so gracefully assumed things at the end there, let me return the favour... You all just love to make excuses on this subreddit to justify petty show-off and then cry 'Bad Sportsmanship' when you end up in a stalemate.
I’m probably in the wrong sub for this. For true beginners, then sure, play on, you might get lucky with a stalemate. Once you start reaching an intermediate level though, it just becomes disrespectful.
I’m talking about clearly lost positions. If you’re playing out an endgame where you’re down an exchange or a pawn or 2, then absolutely play on and try and hold. The comment I initially replied to was talking about being down 2 rooks and a queen. At your level, unless you’re playing bullet maybe, then you’re not going to get a stalemate.
Yeah, well. That was an extreme. But holding when you're about 20% down is generally OK for me (I use that metric since counterattacks and traps are more probable to execute if you still have enough pieces). Depends on positioning, maybe 30%.
I don’t know why you’re getting downvoted. I do the same thing. After a certain elo I think it’s just disrespectful to think I can’t checkmate my opponent who is in a completely lost position (unless of course there is a chance they could flag me) so I have no problem wasting time promoting multiple queens if they won’t resign. Or else sometimes I just won’t move for 20-30 seconds to give them a chance to really think why they aren’t resigning and that normally has a good effect.
It isn’t a matter of need, it’s just rude behavior since it’s basically saying “I don’t think you’re good enough to avoid stalemate.” The pawn promoting is just gloating since they won’t resign.
How is your ego so fragile that someone making you finish the game is taken as them attacking your skill. If you're winning enough that it's obvious the other person is going to lose, then just... Win
It’s not about ego, it’s about intentions. By not resigning and deciding to king walk, the *only* reason to do that is to try and stalemate, which is the same as saying “I don’t think you’re good enough and you might accidentally stalemate.”
This isn’t some weird logic I’m making up, it’s standard in the entire chess community. Hell, even Queen’s Gambit got it right. It’s clear you’ve never played in a club setting, nor have you watched any GM or IM streamers. Stop teaching bad sportsmanship to new players, you’re embarrassing yourself and this subreddit.
I’m not saying you should resign if you lose a queen, I’m talking a 100% lost position at an intermediate level where the opponent has more than sufficient time to mate you, then you should just resign. It’s disrespectful to think they can’t. If I stalemate then jokes on me.
This is what crybabies do when you don’t resign. They think you’re wasting their time so they’ll waste yours. There was a whole thread just a few days ago about it I think in /r/chess.
I dont know why people are so obsessed with the winning play, or think that white is stupid and made a mistake..
Theres a 99.9% chance white was just having fun and thanked u for not conceding while he was doing his thing by granting you a draw..
No, it's more like having 4 queens for fun.
And both players know that the guy who has 4 queens can win, if he wants to, doing the staircase only. But it's boring sometimes
Can you show us your game? It is pretty hard to NOT somehow checkmate black in the position by accident with all the queens on the board.
I am inclined to believe two theories.
1. Your opponent really did somehow managed to stalemate you of out sheer luck.
2. Your opponent is a Smurf and is purposely trying for a stalemate.
When you play on chess.com, you knowingly accept that your games will be accessible for everyone else. I assume it should be possible to find that specific game just using the board state in your picture.
a stalemate doesn't rank you down though, so i really think he was just trying to flex with the promoting business he got going on there. toxic people don't think about stuff like stalemates, they want 9 queens just to show how much better they are at the game!
Toxic things can be fun. I guess that's actually part of the definition.
I want to play chess. It's rather that these opponents apparently don't want to play chess and would much rather play tetris.
How can the game be lost if my opponent can't be arsed to checkmate? That doesn't make any sense. Often enough, they will still screw up and proceed to a stalemate, why would i resign? He's at least giving me a chance to avoid a loss, and i will gladly accept it.
I'm there to play in good spirit until the end, and i expect my opponent to do the same. If you really need to throw the full tantrum and show off your promoting skills, fine by me - but remember, it's your time you waste, not mine.
Your opponent was an idiot who thinks he deserves to win because he got a winning position but wasn’t smart enough to convert it he got exacrly what he deserves
1. White gets the upper hand and is up two rooks while black has lost all his pieces.
2. One rook traps the king on the a-file while the other rook eats any remaining black pawns.
3. White marches his pawns forward and makes a bunch of queens. Black can't do anything about it.
I analyzed the image and this is what I see. Open an appropriate link below and explore the position yourself or with the engine:
> **White to play**: [chess.com](https://chess.com/analysis?fen=2QQQQQQ/8/2R5/8/k2K4/8/8/1R6+w+-+-+0+1&flip=true&ref_id=23962172) | [lichess.org](https://lichess.org/analysis/2QQQQQQ/8/2R5/8/k2K4/8/8/1R6_w_-_-_0_1)
> **Black to play**: It is a stalemate - it is Black's turn, but Black has no legal moves and is not in check. In this case, the game is a draw. It is a critical rule to know for various endgame positions that helps one side hold a draw. You can find out more about Stalemate on [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalemate).
---
^(I'm a bot written by ) [^(u/pkacprzak )](https://www.reddit.com/u/pkacprzak) ^(| get me as ) [^(Chess eBook Reader )](https://ebook.chessvision.ai?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=bot) ^(|) [^(Chrome Extension )](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/chessvisionai-for-chrome/johejpedmdkeiffkdaodgoipdjodhlld) ^(|) [^(iOS App )](https://apps.apple.com/us/app/id1574933453) ^(|) [^(Android App )](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=ai.chessvision.scanner) ^(to scan and analyze positions | Website: ) [^(Chessvision.ai)](https://chessvision.ai)
i would guess your opponent is rewarding you with a draw for being the only person on the planet who would keep playing from that position instead of resigning.
What happened was your opponent assembled exodia by collecting 5 queens but then ruined it by summoning a 6th queen so it was a draw by overly sufficient material
admittedly i managed to stalemate as the "winning" player. i m much more careful since.
personally i feel that if you're at an overwhelming disadvantage and have to rely on opponents blundering to win, just resign. theres no honour and nothing new to learn when you drag out the battle.
note: i m not saying you should resign on whim, just analyze the board and if you see no real path to victory except if the opponent blunders a lot, its really a waste of everyones time.
Step 1: start a game of chess.
Step 2: realize you can't win if your opponent plays 100% precise.
Step 3: resign and quit chess.
Got it, boss.
Who can win a game without a mistake from an opponent side? It's all about being as precise as you can and exploiting opponent mistakes.
And if you can see a clear path to win a game in an equal situation you just don't see some moves your opponent can play and being too oprimistic.
as i said,i m not saying you should resign on whim, its situational. even grandmasters know when to resign.
if you have a king and nothing else the enemy has 1 rook. youre frankly wasting everyones time by refusing to resign.
my last note was made preemptively exactly for people like you. no disrespect or anything. trying your best to win is admirable. but knowing when to resign is also a graceful act. not wanting to resign when the game clearly is unwinnable is really a waste of time.
you're being super salty for something thats true. i advocate everyone to play chess and try their best. but i also advocate for people to recognize when is the time to resign and just resign gracefully.
honestly i am not such a good player. i m just around 1k elo. if anyone whos clearly in a position that cant regain temppo doesnt resign, then i ll play along and drag the game. i m not doing that to brag, i m doing that because the opponent is wasting both our times by prolonging the game and i ll oblige.
I'm 14h and i love when ppl resign believing in stuff you said for ex cause they lost the tempo and all, but the evaluation says +4 to them. GMs can resign when it's needed because they are so good. We can't. We're newbies and can't really tell what's going on in most situations. Prolonging and fighting against the odds is when you have the most brilliant ideas. Not always, of course, but that's one way to improve. We can only resign in a smart way about 5-10 moves before mate in the most obvious situations. And at this point just give your opponent that sweet checkmate pop up. It doesn't take long. Yes, you can resign if you blundered a major piece with nothing to gain back and you don't feel fighting this to the end. But if you did so you should better go rest after this resign.
The amount of 700 rated players who don't know any end game is astounding. Blundered my queen multiple games and still managed to win because opponent did not know how to checkmate with queen or king rook pair.
When beginning in chess you should really learn when to resign with grace. You learn nothing from losing pieces and running around the board. Try to see where you went wrong and learn from it.
The thing about resigning is that it doesn't feel as good as getting checkmated. Ending a game by checkmate is fulfilling. And it was only a move away from check mate, move either rooks and it's checkmate, so I have no idea why they did that.
Think about it like solving a Rubik’s cube. Sometimes rather than solving the puzzle the traditional way, you get bored and attempt to make a cool pattern out of the colors. From looking at the board it appears as though they herded your king into that position to intentionally end the game in this pattern. My bet is this is a smurf, so an increase in rating isn’t as important as dominating the board.
Hey, OP! Did your game end in a stalemate? Did you encounter a weird pawn move? Are you trying to move a piece and it's not going? We have just the resource for you! The [Chess Beginners Wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/chessbeginners/wiki/index/) is the perfect place to check out answers to these questions and more! The moderator team of r/chessbeginners wishes to remind everyone of the community rules. **Posting spam, being a troll, and posting memes are not allowed.** We encourage everyone to report these kinds of posts so they can be dealt with. Thank you! Let's do our utmost to be kind in our replies and comments. Some people here just want to learn chess and have virtually no idea about certain chess concepts. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/chessbeginners) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It literally would have taken only one move to make this a mate instead. Good lord
Yeah, it baffles me why the opponent would just move their freaking King at that moment
plottwist: you are the opponent and post this for easy karma. sneaky!
Based on the location of the pawns that turned into queens, I don't think that's the case. Though I'm also an idiot, so your point still might stand.
There's a flip board button on chess.com
When I first saw this, I thought it was just a more dramatic resignation
Just turn your phone upside down before taking the screenshot.
You can flip the board with x
THE PLOT THICCCENSSS!!
First they wanted to make a lot of queens because it's fun the first time you do it, then they were like "I'll just use the rooks, I don't want them to think I needed all these queens" and they were sloppy about the impact those queens have.
Because this happened to them more than once?
I count 21 different mates in 1
I think I only found 17 but I kept losing track of which ones I counted EDIT: I think I missed 4 mates that the rook on c6 can deliver by going to c1-4
Problem is though is that it's only mate in 1 if it's white to move. Since it's black to move its stalemate.
He found the one move that wasn’t checkmate and had to play it.
Beginners don’t often get the board clear with lots of pawns left. They rarely get that level of control, so sometimes going for the fast win once you gain control of the board seems like it lessens the excitement. So playing around with an open board in a real game is more fun than winning. It’s like taking a trick shot when you aren’t the best. A normal shot would be better overall when it comes to winning, but the trick shot doesn’t come often to some so they have fun with it. I agree in a game like chess it seems especially stupid or pointless, but it just follows normal behaviours and shows they care about chess to learn to play but aren’t focused on becoming the best they can be yet.
Yes, the worst kind of amateurish playing. You only get one point for winning a game. You don’t get extra points for having six queens you don’t need.
Seriously - I never resign but did today when someone started marching their remaining 3 pawns across the board while I just had a king to move between 2 spaces. They already had 2 rooks and a promoted queen..
Ironically the moment I see them getting a bunch of queens I’ll try to see if I can get a stalemate. So many times they’re so focused on getting 5 queens that they don’t notice that they either 1) have no time, or 2) the more likely one, that promoting their queens ends in stalemate.
Hard same.
[удалено]
Lol facts
That can get your own account banned
Why? You sign up for a ten minute game you get ten minutes to make your moves.
There’s a difference between using the time controls, vs deliberately wasting your opponent’s time. If you think for each move and then play to win etc then that’s fine, but if you just run the clock down then you can be banned for being unsporting The exact situation and how often you do it will affect things - eg if you run the clock down every time your opponent has a forced mate, you’ll be banned much faster than if you slow play a clearly losing position but do continue to play
I don't think you'll get banned in either scenario.
You don’t get banned for running down the clock
That's dumb. Stalling is petty and you know it.
So because you are too stubborn to resign and accept defeat, and the opponent equally decides to BM by promoting all their pawns, you then decide to waste time by actually doing something ban worthy (stalling)? That’s really dumb, and petty. It’s just a game, resigning and losing a few ELO isn’t the end of the world
But are they really wasting more time than the person who has mate in one or two moves and refuses to do it because they’ve been dIsReSpEcTeD? I’d rather earn a checkmate than be given a resignation. Mate me or don’t, but I don’t owe you anything in addition to having lost.
Fair, but your opponents don't owe you a swift defeat either. I do that sometimes because it's fun to me, not a waste of time. I don't mind being on the receiving end either. If you're not having fun, resign. Or would you rather actually waste time by stalling because you've been dIsReSpEcTeD by your opponent having a bit of fun?
Yes. If you won’t resign, you shouldn’t be surprised if your opponent will equally disrespect you back. Both are bad sportsmanship, but stalling is another level of petty and actually can get you banned. If you stall because you don’t want to resign, then you shouldn’t be playing chess. Go take a breather, it’s a game.
>But are they really wasting more time Yes. you are 100% wasting more time by refusing to play out moves that can be made over the course of 1 or 2 minutes while you wait for your 10 minute clock to run out
Or you can swallow your ego and resign. Mating in whatever way you want isn't toxic since the other guy can resign whenever they want to, wasting someone's time because they hurt your ego is.
Running your king on a clearly lost game is equivalent to getting multiple queens on a clearly won game. I say, it’s all part of the game. If the winner wants to end it now, they can mate them in a few moves (if that many). If the loser wants to end it now, they can resign.
I don't have an issue with that, I'm saying waiting for your time to end is toxic.
Oh yeah, agreed.
or how about the opponent swallows his ego and just checkmates? purposefully wasting time is just as toxic. in such a situation, i will try my luck and hope he screws up with a stalemate or runs out of time. why? because i can.
It doesn't waste anyone's time to promote all your pawns. Bored? Just resign. It doesn't waste anyone's time to keep playing your forced moves, expecting your opponent to scew up and stalemate. Bored? Just checkmate. It does however waste both players' time if the losing side decides to just wait until their time runs off. That's the "hurt ego" part of my argument.
Except it's not a hurt ego. I wouldn't waste my time, as picture above shows that there's still a point in it for me, and I'd accept the offer. Opponent could offer a draw if his intention is to give me a point, so he ultimately would waste his own time. That's the point you're not getting. Glad to help you out.
>I'm losing therefore I'll just wait for until my time runs out or my **winning** opponent gets bored and offers draw. Sounds legit
Thanks for proving my point. Opponent doesn't win if he refuses to checkmate. That's the opposite of winning the game. And dumb too. Want to win the game and get credit for your win? Checkmate. It's that easy really.
I am actually shocked that there are more people on this subreddit that would take the side of the person stalling. In any other community the majority of people would say the person afk'ing is a dick. It seems like chess players have the biggest egos out of any community
It’s not a hurt ego. It’s a final middle finger to someone trying to flex.
>It's not a hurt ego. It's a hurt ego. Thanks for playing
Lmao. If you’re intentionally refusing to checkmate and instead just making queens, then you deserve that draw. I’m not going to resign because it’s what you want.
If someone fucks up trying to get 6 queens and stalemates, yeah they deserved to get the stalemate. If someone just plays their forced moves until their opponent gets however many queens expecting a stalemate, sure it's fine. If someone keeps their opponent hostage in a game by waiting, they're butthurt.
It’s not flexing, it’s bm’ing. Not resigning when you only have a king left is equally just as bad, since you’re basically saying “I don’t think you’re good enough to not stalemate.” Tit for tat, if the opponent chooses to promote pawns cause you won’t resign, don’t throw a hissy fit.
>it’s bm’ing It's *what* now?
bm = bad manner
No I'm not °-°
>Or you can swallow your ego and mate > >Making moves until the game ends without resigning isn’t toxic since the other guy can just mate if they want to win, wasting someone’s time to stroke your own ego is. Thanks for playing
Whether they're promoting all their pawns to stroke their ego or for fun is irrelevant because if you're bored you can always get out of the situation by resigning. However if the losing side decides to just wait until their time runs out that's toxic since the winning side now has to wait with them. It is really not that hard to understand this.
“I’m allowed to waste their time, but they’re not allowed to waste my time!” Oh but they can just resign if they want, so can you. Or just be a decent player and end the game if you’ve clearly won.
>so can you Yeah people should just resign games they won because their opponent is trying to waste their time. Don't be dense, if someone wants to promote pawns they want to promote pawns. If someone doesn't want to resign, they don't want to resign. These are both cool since they don't force anyone to spend any more time than they're willing to spend. If you wait for your time to run out because you lost, you're just compensating for your hurt ego by "taking control".
Just like you’re “taking control” by doing useless things on an already decided game. Both things are equally bad. Some people will resign, some people won’t, but don’t act like them not resigning is somehow worse than you not ending the game cause you’re not done with the power trip
I don't take control of anything since I don't promote all my pawns but even if I did my opponent would have the choice to either keep playing or resign. I just said not resigning is not a bad thing, it is cool if you keep playing expecting your opponent to screw up and stalemate. Not resigning is not the same thing as sitting on your hands, waiting for your time to run out. That's just resigning, but childishly.
Apparently some people are not amused when you refuse to resign, seeing it as in you trying to waste their precious time. So they proceed to play the uno reverse card, only to realize that they play chess and not uno and ultimately end up wasting their own time. Just my kind of humor.
i foresee this getting downvoted but if you are in a position where you’ve got no pieces and they have a ladder mate you could just resign out of respect for them outplaying you tbf, same reason people otb resign in dead lost positions to avoid wasting both player’s time. the winner’s already clear.
Respect? LOL If my opponent throws a tantrum because i refuse to resign in a casual game, while he could just easily end the game on his own within a few seconds, then he definetly doesn't earn my "respect". And as the picture above shows, the winner is not clear at all. Even if this is faked, this definetly happens often enough.
You should keep playing, chances are they stalemate and just get 1 point instead of beating you and boosting their Elo. And it will frustrate them infinitely more that they stalemated a game 4 queens and 2 rooks up.
I do that to annoy people who don’t resign. If you want to waste my time by not resigning a clearly lost position, I’m going to waste yours right back.
Why would he resign if opponent messing with him and it's supper funny to push loss into draw?
Once you’re above 1300 or so, you really shouldn’t be getting a stalemate in a winning end game. I understand lower Elo players playing on, but once you reach a certain point, it just becomes disrespectful.
Wow, so you actually exist. Good to know. Living in a world where trying your best is somehow disrespectful while griefing is fine, what a time be alive.
[удалено]
If you have a clear advantage, checkmate should be quick.
I play 30 minute games, and players can easily burn through 5-10 minutes finding moves to prolong a clearly losing position. I find it disrespectful. Most players of an intermediate level or higher would agree.
Couple of things: 1) There are definitely skills that you can develop when playing a clearly lost or clearly won game. People play long time constraints so they can think through their moves carefully. So what if they're losing? It's rude if they're just wasting time, or take 3 minutes to make their only legal move before M1, but not if they're actively trying to win or draw. 2) There are, occasionally, ways to force stalemate or perpetual check or repetition. Seeing those, too, is a useful skill to develop, even at high levels. 3) If you're upset that they're wasting your time, why not just offer a draw or resign? You'd rather waste time on a boring game than lose rating, which is fair - but then you can't fault those players for pointlessly trying to salvage a draw and their rating, either. You have the option of playing daily or playing a bot or going on your phone or just offering a draw and starting a new game, rather than demanding that other players play exactly the way you want. Playing chess on a chess website is not disrespectful IMO
People in this sub encourage that kind of behavior, it’s no surprise you’re being downvoted. I think the bar is even lower, 800+ ELO it’s uncommon to stalemate unless you’re messing around. They’re just petty and making excuses
Ppl don't resign in hope of a stalemate. Just checkmate them.
Which is rude. Unless you’re playing at like 400-600 ELO, it’s bad sportsmanship.
Giving your best by all costs against an opponent is a good sportsmanship. That's called respecting your opponent. And if you're not a GM yourself you can only predict obvious and close mates. At this point you should let your opponent have this checkmate pop up. Just look at the evaluations after your opponents or you resign? I'm 14h, and in 25% more or less cases my opponents resign cause they think they're losing but the eval says that's me who is done.
King walking is not giving it your best, it’s hanging on to a tiny sliver of hope while simultaneously saying to the opponent “you suck, I think you might stalemate so I won’t resign.” We’re talking about completely lost positions, such as this post where it’s 1 king vs. multiple pawns and 2 rooks. OP’s post in particular seems to be stalemate on purpose, otherwise it has to be a very very low rated game.
If you have Two Rooks vs your opponent's king and you are promoting pawns than you deserve to have your time wasted or your opponent playing king moves in hope of getting a stalemate. I would get if you were a beginner with Rook, King and pawn who doesn't know how to checkmate with king and rook but if you have two rooks or a rook and a queen and still wanna push pawn and risk a stalemate than that's completely on you.
If you have no pieces left and your opponent has more than enough to checkmate you and you still won’t resign, you deserve to be embarrassed with a 5 queen checkmate. You all just love to make excuses on this subreddit to try and squeeze a stalemate, which is just petty and bad sportsmanship.
>If you have no pieces left and your opponent has more than enough to checkmate you and you still won’t resign This is a pointless debate. I would just say why would I resign when the opponent is busy wasting his own time promoting his pawns instead of checkmating and winning. Then you would say that you are promoting the pawns because the opponent is wasting your time by not resigning. Let me ask you one thing, What is your actual problem with people playing till checkmate ? Is it wasted time ? Then just checkmate your opponent. Simple as that. If you wanna 'rub it in' by promoting your pawns, you risk a stalemate. You really don't need 3 queens on top of your two rooks to checkmate, if you still wanna do it and end up drawing coz of stalemate, that's completely on you. I would never ever EVER resign if an opponent is pushing pawn when there is a mate in 3 position. i don't care what people like you think is 'petty' or 'bad sportsmanship', I don't care if I end up getting mated with 5 queens, The opponent can celebrate that W. But If there is a chance to get a result out of that position, I will always go for it. Don't like it ? Too bad. No one gives an F. Oopsi, Got a Stalemate ? Should have just checkmated when you had a chance. And since you so gracefully assumed things at the end there, let me return the favour... You all just love to make excuses on this subreddit to justify petty show-off and then cry 'Bad Sportsmanship' when you end up in a stalemate.
Or you could checkmate?
I’m probably in the wrong sub for this. For true beginners, then sure, play on, you might get lucky with a stalemate. Once you start reaching an intermediate level though, it just becomes disrespectful.
Disrespectful to try and get ½ point? That's just good gameplay, the most respectful thing you can do.
It’s disrespectful when there’s no chance of it happening, yes.
stocking cows rotten impossible zesty society weary friendly grey lavish *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I’m talking about clearly lost positions. If you’re playing out an endgame where you’re down an exchange or a pawn or 2, then absolutely play on and try and hold. The comment I initially replied to was talking about being down 2 rooks and a queen. At your level, unless you’re playing bullet maybe, then you’re not going to get a stalemate.
Yeah, well. That was an extreme. But holding when you're about 20% down is generally OK for me (I use that metric since counterattacks and traps are more probable to execute if you still have enough pieces). Depends on positioning, maybe 30%.
I don’t know why you’re getting downvoted. I do the same thing. After a certain elo I think it’s just disrespectful to think I can’t checkmate my opponent who is in a completely lost position (unless of course there is a chance they could flag me) so I have no problem wasting time promoting multiple queens if they won’t resign. Or else sometimes I just won’t move for 20-30 seconds to give them a chance to really think why they aren’t resigning and that normally has a good effect.
[удалено]
It isn’t a matter of need, it’s just rude behavior since it’s basically saying “I don’t think you’re good enough to avoid stalemate.” The pawn promoting is just gloating since they won’t resign.
How is your ego so fragile that someone making you finish the game is taken as them attacking your skill. If you're winning enough that it's obvious the other person is going to lose, then just... Win
It’s not about ego, it’s about intentions. By not resigning and deciding to king walk, the *only* reason to do that is to try and stalemate, which is the same as saying “I don’t think you’re good enough and you might accidentally stalemate.” This isn’t some weird logic I’m making up, it’s standard in the entire chess community. Hell, even Queen’s Gambit got it right. It’s clear you’ve never played in a club setting, nor have you watched any GM or IM streamers. Stop teaching bad sportsmanship to new players, you’re embarrassing yourself and this subreddit.
I’m not saying you should resign if you lose a queen, I’m talking a 100% lost position at an intermediate level where the opponent has more than sufficient time to mate you, then you should just resign. It’s disrespectful to think they can’t. If I stalemate then jokes on me.
[удалено]
It’s basically shitposting but in chess.com
Just resign...........
Yall talk like winning is the only way to have fun in chess.
Not necessarily, they did get... [checks upvotes]... About 484 points for it, as of the time of this comment.
This is what crybabies do when you don’t resign. They think you’re wasting their time so they’ll waste yours. There was a whole thread just a few days ago about it I think in /r/chess.
Mentally scarring your opponent is worth more than 1 point
That king move makes it look deliberate
I know right? Why would one draw a winning game??
I imagine your opponent is a member of the sub which must not be mentioned.
I'm afraid to ask but.....which sub?
r/chess
No no no, the other one.
r/checkers
Yeah that one
The anarchy one
I dont know why people are so obsessed with the winning play, or think that white is stupid and made a mistake.. Theres a 99.9% chance white was just having fun and thanked u for not conceding while he was doing his thing by granting you a draw..
You're telling me that people draw out of respect and gratitude? ...I feel like a shitty person now.
No, it's more like having 4 queens for fun. And both players know that the guy who has 4 queens can win, if he wants to, doing the staircase only. But it's boring sometimes
Absolutely
Can you show us your game? It is pretty hard to NOT somehow checkmate black in the position by accident with all the queens on the board. I am inclined to believe two theories. 1. Your opponent really did somehow managed to stalemate you of out sheer luck. 2. Your opponent is a Smurf and is purposely trying for a stalemate.
How would I go about showing you the game?? I'm kinda new to this stuff
When you open the game from your game history, there should be a button to share a link at the bottom
Would the reveal the information of the opponent too tho? If so, I don't really want to do that
I understand your concern, but if it makes you feel any better, all of those games are public and easily searchable. There is no privacy on Chess.com.
Damn, should've read those privacy policies I guess
Yeah I'm going to go with fake on this one. Seems like a lot of avoidance and playing dumb to me.
When you play on chess.com, you knowingly accept that your games will be accessible for everyone else. I assume it should be possible to find that specific game just using the board state in your picture.
Why does it feel like I'm gonna blunder an important piece if I say something here??
Because the more you talk the faker this post seems.
🤓
a stalemate doesn't rank you down though, so i really think he was just trying to flex with the promoting business he got going on there. toxic people don't think about stuff like stalemates, they want 9 queens just to show how much better they are at the game!
Is that toxic? I usually find it fun. If you don't want to play just resign, since the game is over anyways?
Toxic things can be fun. I guess that's actually part of the definition. I want to play chess. It's rather that these opponents apparently don't want to play chess and would much rather play tetris.
But as black in this situation you are just done playing. If you just want to play chess, why not resign a lost game and play chess?
How can the game be lost if my opponent can't be arsed to checkmate? That doesn't make any sense. Often enough, they will still screw up and proceed to a stalemate, why would i resign? He's at least giving me a chance to avoid a loss, and i will gladly accept it. I'm there to play in good spirit until the end, and i expect my opponent to do the same. If you really need to throw the full tantrum and show off your promoting skills, fine by me - but remember, it's your time you waste, not mine.
It seems like a tick tok challenge. Can you stalemate your opponent with 6 queens???
Missed wins: 42
Your opponent had a hubris
I guess I got lucky then, a stalemate is better than losing after all
It’s more of a power move though. They’d rather stalemate you with 6 queens and 2 rooks than beat you with a few extra points.
That's an interesting power move if I've ever seen one.
Trolling. It's called trolling.
Your opponent was an idiot who thinks he deserves to win because he got a winning position but wasn’t smart enough to convert it he got exacrly what he deserves
I’m like 99% sure this stalemate was deliberate
100%, I can’t believe people think this was accidental
Yeah, it takes a lot of work to get this stalemate.
forget opponent what were u upto by letting him make this much queens.
1. White gets the upper hand and is up two rooks while black has lost all his pieces. 2. One rook traps the king on the a-file while the other rook eats any remaining black pawns. 3. White marches his pawns forward and makes a bunch of queens. Black can't do anything about it.
Exactly correct
I couldn't stop him(TT)(TT)
Dob't booing him. Everyone makes mistakes. Magnus pre-moved himself into checkmate once. He's here to learn as we all r.
chill out bruv it was just a silly joke.
I analyzed the image and this is what I see. Open an appropriate link below and explore the position yourself or with the engine: > **White to play**: [chess.com](https://chess.com/analysis?fen=2QQQQQQ/8/2R5/8/k2K4/8/8/1R6+w+-+-+0+1&flip=true&ref_id=23962172) | [lichess.org](https://lichess.org/analysis/2QQQQQQ/8/2R5/8/k2K4/8/8/1R6_w_-_-_0_1) > **Black to play**: It is a stalemate - it is Black's turn, but Black has no legal moves and is not in check. In this case, the game is a draw. It is a critical rule to know for various endgame positions that helps one side hold a draw. You can find out more about Stalemate on [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalemate). --- ^(I'm a bot written by ) [^(u/pkacprzak )](https://www.reddit.com/u/pkacprzak) ^(| get me as ) [^(Chess eBook Reader )](https://ebook.chessvision.ai?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=bot) ^(|) [^(Chrome Extension )](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/chessvisionai-for-chrome/johejpedmdkeiffkdaodgoipdjodhlld) ^(|) [^(iOS App )](https://apps.apple.com/us/app/id1574933453) ^(|) [^(Android App )](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=ai.chessvision.scanner) ^(to scan and analyze positions | Website: ) [^(Chessvision.ai)](https://chessvision.ai)
i would guess your opponent is rewarding you with a draw for being the only person on the planet who would keep playing from that position instead of resigning.
Did I just got roasted? Lol
https://preview.redd.it/ywc1dsdhaf3b1.jpeg?width=1079&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=fb9e6869f3297e0aed1ae0ad7bc338184385a89b
Deserved
It’s not about winning or losing, it’s about sending a message
The only way to assert dominance is not by multiple queens but multiple knights.
https://preview.redd.it/bu95n4cpld3b1.jpeg?width=500&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8bffe604d01f044ce5ffd640e85b77b6d92e6558
Flexing I think; or smurfing and getting draws so they don’t rank up too fast.
These are the most obnoxious opponents. You win the game by mating your opponent, there’s not extra price for making 6 queens. It’s just unnecessary.
Never resign
Rule number... 189: Don't get too many queens
Perfect chess ends in a draw
Opponent clearly thinks this is a gal game where the objective was to build a harem.
If such, they have undoubtedly succeeded. Meanwhile my king is the loner in the background.
Do chess players just not know what humor is or something. So many people trying to logically question why they played like this and got a stale.
https://preview.redd.it/w4optrsx7f3b1.jpeg?width=374&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=23fd32d66074f365cedff6f15cdb08ff2d46b77d
Do professional chess set really have that many queens or is this just something they allow in the digital realm?
Genuinely interested to know this
Checkmating with fewer pieces is more impressive than a bunch of queens. Also, never resign if your rating is under 1500.
[удалено]
Ah, the pain of being stuck in 2D.
They were trying to assemble Exodia
What happened was your opponent assembled exodia by collecting 5 queens but then ruined it by summoning a 6th queen so it was a draw by overly sufficient material
Moving literally any other piece would’ve won
He was Ultra Greedy so he got what he deserved 😂
admittedly i managed to stalemate as the "winning" player. i m much more careful since. personally i feel that if you're at an overwhelming disadvantage and have to rely on opponents blundering to win, just resign. theres no honour and nothing new to learn when you drag out the battle. note: i m not saying you should resign on whim, just analyze the board and if you see no real path to victory except if the opponent blunders a lot, its really a waste of everyones time.
Step 1: start a game of chess. Step 2: realize you can't win if your opponent plays 100% precise. Step 3: resign and quit chess. Got it, boss. Who can win a game without a mistake from an opponent side? It's all about being as precise as you can and exploiting opponent mistakes. And if you can see a clear path to win a game in an equal situation you just don't see some moves your opponent can play and being too oprimistic.
as i said,i m not saying you should resign on whim, its situational. even grandmasters know when to resign. if you have a king and nothing else the enemy has 1 rook. youre frankly wasting everyones time by refusing to resign. my last note was made preemptively exactly for people like you. no disrespect or anything. trying your best to win is admirable. but knowing when to resign is also a graceful act. not wanting to resign when the game clearly is unwinnable is really a waste of time. you're being super salty for something thats true. i advocate everyone to play chess and try their best. but i also advocate for people to recognize when is the time to resign and just resign gracefully. honestly i am not such a good player. i m just around 1k elo. if anyone whos clearly in a position that cant regain temppo doesnt resign, then i ll play along and drag the game. i m not doing that to brag, i m doing that because the opponent is wasting both our times by prolonging the game and i ll oblige.
I'm 14h and i love when ppl resign believing in stuff you said for ex cause they lost the tempo and all, but the evaluation says +4 to them. GMs can resign when it's needed because they are so good. We can't. We're newbies and can't really tell what's going on in most situations. Prolonging and fighting against the odds is when you have the most brilliant ideas. Not always, of course, but that's one way to improve. We can only resign in a smart way about 5-10 moves before mate in the most obvious situations. And at this point just give your opponent that sweet checkmate pop up. It doesn't take long. Yes, you can resign if you blundered a major piece with nothing to gain back and you don't feel fighting this to the end. But if you did so you should better go rest after this resign.
The amount of 700 rated players who don't know any end game is astounding. Blundered my queen multiple games and still managed to win because opponent did not know how to checkmate with queen or king rook pair.
Your opponent is just stupid.
They probably tried to put all their pieces on the back rank
When beginning in chess you should really learn when to resign with grace. You learn nothing from losing pieces and running around the board. Try to see where you went wrong and learn from it.
I usually do this to humiliate my opponent, like he is not even worth beating, kind of like I won't even waste my spit in you type thing
Players who don’t resign deserve to get roped. Players who rope carelessly deserve to get a stalemate.
Then doesn't that invalidate the first statement because there's a slight chance that the opponent will go monke and make this mistake?
C a r e l e s s l y. If you rope without noting possible stalemates then you should get a stalemate.
Still any win is win.
R u saying that ppl who don't resign deserve a draw?
Why? He pushed his loss into statement. Great achievement.
What do you mean by rope?
He was just going back home while waiting for you to do the right thing: Resign.
I don't mind ppl stalemating me to punish for not resigning. I would never lose this way.
The thing about resigning is that it doesn't feel as good as getting checkmated. Ending a game by checkmate is fulfilling. And it was only a move away from check mate, move either rooks and it's checkmate, so I have no idea why they did that.
Yeah, that's why i also always let opponent checkmate me even if i know i'm done. You can mate me? Take it, well deserved.
Think about it like solving a Rubik’s cube. Sometimes rather than solving the puzzle the traditional way, you get bored and attempt to make a cool pattern out of the colors. From looking at the board it appears as though they herded your king into that position to intentionally end the game in this pattern. My bet is this is a smurf, so an increase in rating isn’t as important as dominating the board.
Or maybe instead of promoting 6 pawns like a dick, was right thing to do to go for instant checkmate???
I think they stalemated by accident, because they were annoyed that you didn't resign way earlier in a lost position.
~~up to~~ high on
Opponent up ya backrank gump