Playing until checkmate

Why players keep on playing after catastrophic material loss or in a hopeless tactical situation ? Not only it is a waste of time, it is extremely boring.

Style of play, I suppose

Does a soccer team give up if they are 2-0 down? 

I don't understand people getting so upset about playing the game to mate.  Even in a completely lost game, there are tactical situations and learning possibilities.  I will keep playing someone if I am at material disadvantage, because a.) There is always a chance to come up with something brilliant, and b.) Every position you come across is an opportunity to learn.

And if I am up in material, I need to focus and complete the game.  Resigning is an option, if your opponent opts not to resign, then you must finish them. 

Now there are times when there is no chance, a pawn that can't be stopped, extreme endgame advantages, but I would never fault someone for playing the game through.

Here's my favourite, the last 1st round game of a tourney that started on June 1. Move 77, and still going, with timeout protection almost every move....

Within the rules, I know, but just a little inconsiderate of the rest of the field

We are not playing soccer ;-) There are exceptions, of course, but loss of 3+ material points is catastrophic. Unless it is an exotic, theretically drawn ending, or some tactical compensation, I go not see any learning potential in waiting for an inevitable checkmate.

i'll often play out a losing game. not all the way to checkmate, but a little longer.

1. i want to see if i can force a mistake
2. i want to try some tactics for end game play

i'm not doing it to be difficult, and the opponent should know he's won and be satisfied. i'm doing it to improve.

i've had one guy who was a better player than me, make me play him into mate. i suspect he was trying to see if i'd fall into the trap of stalemate. i mated him, but i think he was being an as to play the way he did.

horses for courses i guess ...

By the way does anyone chat to an opponent if they don't resign?  Such as asking them why they won't.  But I guess that would only encourage them if they could see you were getting annoyed at it. 

Personally resigning just isn't for me.  Don't get offended by it, just make sure you mate me if you want the win! 

Would you resign a game if you were 7 points down in a game.  I managed to mate someone with that amount of points lost in the game. 

I've had a guy refuse to resign when he was TWO queens down.

I would play until checkmate only if I had enough material to checkmate or play to stalemate.

Otherwise I usually resign if I am several pieces down.

This particular game should have ended by checkmate by move 73, not still going on at move 77. I've seen this mistake frequently. The right way is to drive the enemy king toward your own king, not away from your king. E.g. 

This is a very good topic. I am a weak player, and I often leave the game. Out of respect for the opponent, not to waste his time. Maybe it's wrong ...

everyone has the right to play till checkmate. If you have a won position, then show your skill and beat them instead of asking them  to resign.

I've lost more then a good amount of games due to these guys, they just won't give up. I admiir these players... Yeah, I always get the best of them out of the opening. When I was 1200-1330, I would always get a pawn advantage out of the opening... Players would make lots of mistakes. But then the position would get really really complicated... Even now I look back and see how I LOST games where I was like 7 points up, sometimes to my blunders, sometimes the opponents make easy threats and I loose spectacularly. I just played too fast I guess... It's amazing how I keep loosing endgames where I am up a bishop due to like two connected pawns, stupid stuff like that. I go to rybka after and it says I had a 3 pawn advantage... sometimes more. Against me I recommend to play until the end always... I've really lost 50+ games where I had at least a pawn advantage, two pawns, a piece or two pieces, even sometimes more. I've learned some stuff because of that tho... I really love this game

Frustrating sometimes, but thats why it's so cool to get better

for me i resign if i don't think i can win either through material or position, i may not see it before the other player so to them i may be playing on while they think i've lost . If someone can show me the analysis then fine.

if you get angry at someone playing on then just win don't complain i've played people who bitch and moan and say how good they are and how their gonna beat me and how badly i'm doing and then i win. Thats the best thing to do to players like that win.

In all the games I've played on this site I have always won when materially ahead with an even or better position, so I would resign if I was playing someone of the same level who had demonstrated a winning advantage. My theory is that if they're good enough to get to a winning position and I can't find a way out, they'll be good enough to finish me off.

If an opponent wants to play on to the bitter end that is their choice. I will then try to find the quickest, most efficient end to the game, so it does me good anyway. It's often light relief to come to this game after spending ages thinking of moves in some of my closely-fought, tense games.

Never ask an opponent to resign.

Search the forum topics for threads on resigning.

I have a problem with your first point right there...

"1. i want to see if i can force a mistake."

Not only is this bad sportsmanship (in most obviously won/lost positons), it is 100% impossible. You simply cannot "force" a mistake, the making of said mistake is completely up to your oppenent.

I do believe your opponent should have the right to play on, but not when down around a Rook. If it's a beginner, I'm fine with not resigning, they need to learn the Endgame checkmates. If, however, the player is at or above your rating, they really should show some respect and resign.

All right. I'm talking about it and talking about.