Etiquette: Asking opponents to resign

A question about etquette at Little Golem:

Do you think it is okay to ask (equal rated) opponents to resign, if the game result is already pretty clear?

Personally I don't like to waste too much time, if a game is already decided *and* if there isn't any interesting local fight left anymore.

Until now I haven't never directly asked my opponent to resign an already lost game. Which are boring and IMHO a waste of time.

Usually I drop an indirect request to resign with a message like "Doesn't look nice for Black", or I try to explain the game situation with something like "Red will win in about 6 moves either on B3 or B4".

Please note, that I use "Black/White/Red/Yellow" instead of "I/you", and that I'm talking about games between players, who have about the same rating.

Nevertheless, few players insist to continue hopeless games until the last possible (and boring) move.

How do you deal with those situations? What is your nice and polite method to convince an opponent, that it is a better choice to resign?

A blacklist option 'd be nice, i.e.: I prefer not to particate in a tournament, if I start in the same group as player XYZ. My current work-around is, that I usually sign up as the last player of an tournament group.

I don't think there's anything wrong in asking - just explain your opinion politely and ask if they see any use in continuing.

Keep in mind that some players might want to continue a lost game so they can learn from it, so don't condemn them too quickly. If you don't ask, you'll never know what motivates them!

Mac S

Frank, as you said, there are only a few players wich have that behavior. And keep in mind that having the same rating doesnt mean having the same skill. ;-)

Playing some matches that are boring is the price for playing all the other exciting matches.

"...if the game result is already pretty clear?"

Well, it might be clear for you but not so clear for the opponent( that depends on players skills). You could explain to your opponent why the result is clear.

"...few players insist to continue hopeless games until the last possible (and boring) move"

They insist because they want to play the whole game, otherwise they will never become advanced players. It's boring for you , not for them. Think of this: if someone much stronger than you tells you in the middle of the game that you have just lost the game, what will you do?

You can use the blacklist to avoid unwanted players.

Iri, the blacklist has no effect in tournaments.

Hi Iri,

as mentioned in my initial posting,

I usually explain why "Red will loose in a about 6 moves either via B3 or B4" or why "It doesn't loook nice for Black".

I acknowledge, that games with already settled results may remain interesting (because of yet undecided local fights), and I like to provide or receive lessons for those games.

Whether I'm the teacher or the pupil doesn't matter.

What I was initial asking for, is an LG option to avoid particuluar oppoents. In rare cases, I prefer not to sign up for new LG tournaments groups, because I want to avoid the "duty" to finish games against XYZ ...

I think that an option to avoid some players in tournaments is some kind of discrimination. Everyone has the right to play with others.

What I think you request is a champions tournament(a tournament between the best of the best). Am I right?

Hi Iri,

I invite you to play a game against me. Ì'll try my best to behave as silly and stupid as I can during our game. It doesn't matter, whether you or I are the player with the stronger or weaker rating. I'll just try my best to annoy and bore you. ;-)

A result of that game would be, that you desire never to play any other game against me. But that is your personal expierience and decission only.

That far the theory.

When I have to decide, whether or not I join the first round of a Little Golem tournament, I usually check, if that implies that I will have to play against someone, who is on my "mental" blacklist.

In few cases I just prefer not to sign up for a tournament. That is my personal decission, not a server-wide discrimination.

Whether or not a game is interesting, is almost independend of ratings. It is rather a question of character and social skills.

In almost any LG games I am at a level of an average player. Thus your imputation to establish a "champions league" (with limited access) is beyond my reality.

You have asked: Am I right?

My answer is: No, you are wrong.

Frank,

I'm sorry but I don't see your point. If you already have won the game, you will know how to accomplish the win so you won't have to spend time thinking about it. It's just one click and the game is gone again. You won't even have the time to get annoyed.

Realize that for most of us, the fun is in playing the game. Even if we're in totally lost position, we play on because we enjoy the game. We might even admire the skill in which you totally annihilate us ;-)

Ronald

I agree with Ronald.

Frank, a champions league would be interesting, though.

bump