Not resigning really sucks the fun out of the game

Just enjoy the game, you are winning! You can play without pressure, you can see if you find the most effective way to take down your opponent. See it as an exercise :-)

Resigning is always a bad idea

@b4c4d2 said in #13:

> That said - Arena games are a different species. If you see you're going to lose, resign and start a new game. In arena it pays to play more games: quantity > quality.

Thank you for recognizing the low value for quality. Arena and chess were not made for each other. Mostly it jus means it doesn't matter what they set the game clocks for. Advantage to the more frantic player. Set Arena clocks for 60 minute chess games and watch the bullet trolls swarm it like flies to pad their *classical* chess ratings.

@PawncompleX said in #1:
> I don't understand why people don't resign once a game is lost, (...) I don't want to spend any more time playing a game that's over. just me?

I resign too, always ( sometimes even too hastily ).
However, I don't understand what the problem is if the opponent who is losing wants to continue. In fact:
1) If his position is really lost, it doesn't take much to checkmate him, quickly. What do a few extra moves take away from the fun ?
2) If he manages to escape thanks to your last-minute blunder, or surprise you with a stalemate, you didn't deserve to win and he was right to continue.
In both cases, what is the problem ?

I was better nearly the whole game. Then 2 big blunders in a row.
Therefore white now has mate in 3
I see that, should i resign?
Not in this case.
The opponent has to prove me being weak.

By the way if my opponent in #16 would have resigned earlier in the game then he would have totally missed the opportunity to mate me.

@joergg said in #17:
> By the way if my opponent in #16 would have resigned earlier in the game then he would have totally missed the opportunity to mate me.
To be fair @PawncompleX specified he's not talking about technically lost but tactically rich positions, but about completely lost endgames with pretty much no material left. I get his frustration but it's just not productive to get angry about. In your game though, things are still pretty complex.

If you're at the point of playing random moves, you've already accepted that you've lost no? it just comes off as an immature end to the game imo. I'd rather start a new game where we can be evenly matched than play rook/pawn endgame #1092

it is not immature or unpolite. It is part playing blitz or bullet. Cannot stand that you have to switch to longer time controls. Whole point of blitz and bullet is to finish the game in allocated time. Time resource just as much as pieces. As rule of thum early phases of 5min blitz 30 seconds is worth about half a pawn.