Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 24

Thread: Resigning

  1. #1
    CC Candidate Master Zelgiusfan5000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    127

    Resigning

    Are there any rules against resigning in a position where it’s impossible to lose?

  2. #2
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    38,920
    Quote Originally Posted by Zelgiusfan5000 View Post
    Are there any rules against resigning in a position where it’s impossible to lose?
    No, though in an unrated and low-level junior interschool tournament I had a situation of this kind once. One of the players had mating material and the other had only a king. The player with mating material was frustrated that she could not work out how to win and resigned. I explained that the worst that could happen to her was a draw and told the players to continue.

    Also of note here is the famous Sztern-Lundquist NSW Champs 1983. See https://www.kingpinchess.net/2010/03...hess-magazine/ Black (to move) offered a draw, White asked to see Black's move, Black played a queen sacrifice forcing mate and White resigned forgetting that he could have accepted the draw.
    Last edited by Kevin Bonham; 08-04-2020 at 02:02 PM. Reason: correction see below
    Moderation Requests: All requests for, comments about, or questions about moderation of any kind including thread changes must be posted in the Help and Feedback section and not on the thread in question. (Or by private message for routine changes or sensitive matters.)

    ACF Newsletter Information - All Australian players and administrators should subscribe and check each issue for relevant notices

    My psephology/politics site (token chess references only) : http://kevinbonham.blogspot.com.au/ Politics twitter feed https://twitter.com/kevinbonham

  3. #3
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    420
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Bonham View Post
    No, though in an unrated and low-level junior interschool tournament I had a situation of this kind once. One of the players had mating material and the other had only a king. The player with mating material was frustrated that she could not work out how to win and resigned. I explained that the worst that could happen to her was a draw and told the players to continue.

    Also of note here is the famous Sztern-Lundquist Adelaide 1983. See https://www.kingpinchess.net/2010/03...hess-magazine/ Black (to move) offered a draw, White asked to see Black's move, Black played a queen sacrifice forcing mate and White resigned forgetting that he could have accepted the draw.
    Sztern- Lundquist was played in the NSW Championship, not in Adelaide, and the loser went on to win the title.

  4. #4
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    38,920
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian_Rogers View Post
    Sztern- Lundquist was played in the NSW Championship, not in Adelaide, and the loser went on to win the title.
    Thanks; post corrected.
    Moderation Requests: All requests for, comments about, or questions about moderation of any kind including thread changes must be posted in the Help and Feedback section and not on the thread in question. (Or by private message for routine changes or sensitive matters.)

    ACF Newsletter Information - All Australian players and administrators should subscribe and check each issue for relevant notices

    My psephology/politics site (token chess references only) : http://kevinbonham.blogspot.com.au/ Politics twitter feed https://twitter.com/kevinbonham

  5. #5
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by Zelgiusfan5000 View Post
    Are there any rules against resigning in a position where it’s impossible to lose?
    You cannot resign a dead position, you cannot resign if a quintuple repetition has occurred, you cannot resign if a sequence of 75 moves without capture and pawn movement has occurred, you cannot resign if you have checkmated your opponent's king or if the arbiter has notified you that you have won on time.

    In general, you cannot resign if the game is already terminated even if you did not realise that the game is over. Long ago, the FIDE Rules Commission issued this interpretation. Player A plays a legal move that produce stalemate, this move is so threatening (unavoidable mate in one), that his opponent, player B, resign. It is latter found there was a stalemate on the board. The resignation is null and void and is considered to have never occurred. There was no game in progress at the moment of the resignation, so nothing can be resigned.

    From the FIDE General Regulation for Competitions

    9.4 Where it is clear that results have been arranged – see FIDE Handbook E.01 – Laws of Chess article 11.1, the CA shall impose suitable penalties – see FIDE Handbook E.01 –Laws of Chess article 12.9 .

    If the arbiter is convinced that the resignation of a position impossible to loose by normal means is the result of an agreement between the players, he may take action. The rule does not grant the arbiter the power to order the game to continue. In a famous case in Montreal, a junior player that could win the junior price was playing against an adult that could no longer win any price. The junior asked the adult to loose in exchange of a payment, but did so in a public place in front of many witnesses. The final result was 0-0 for arranging the game result. A disciplinary hearing for bringing the game of chess into disrepute followed the incident

  6. #6
    CC FIDE Master
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Christchurch, New Zealand
    Posts
    563
    Obviously a game that has ended within the rules can't be resigned, but in theory a player could resign an unloseable position eg KR vs K or KQ vs KN. Agree that it would be reasonable for an Arbiter to investigate collusion/match-fixing. Potential explanations could be hearing a phone go off and erroneously assuming it was yours, or believing that the opponent was check/stalemated when they aren't and stopping the clock and setting up the pieces.
    IA Craig Hall

    www.chess.org.nz - Canterbury Chess Club
    http://respectrum.nz - Major sponsor

  7. #7
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by Craig_Hall View Post
    Obviously a game that has ended within the rules can't be resigned, but in theory a player could resign an unloseable position eg KR vs K or KQ vs KN. Agree that it would be reasonable for an Arbiter to investigate collusion/match-fixing. Potential explanations could be hearing a phone go off and erroneously assuming it was yours, or believing that the opponent was check/stalemated when they aren't and stopping the clock and setting up the pieces.
    The arbiter should never immediately conclude that a lack of judgement when resigning is an arranged match. The Quebec Chess Federation did publish many positions that were resigned in actual play despite the fact that there was no valid reason to do so. The funniest situation was the resignation of a player who believed that a back row mate was unavoidable but who had failed to realised that his opponent's king was in check, thus making the checkmating move illegal. If the player had let the opponent deliver checkmate with an illegal move, this checkmate would have been declared null and void.

    This site has many examples of bad resignations that could not be penalised unless the arbiter can prove that the game has been arranged because it is not possible to infer the arrangement from the resignation itself. https://chess24.com/en/read/news/the...a-won-position

    Resignation of a won position is not so rare, arranged games that can be penalised are extremely rare.

    Arbiters must be very careful when declaring that a game has been arranged because such decision may have a huge impact on the honour and the reputation of the players involved. Furthermore, most National Federations and local Leagues will suspend the guilty persons.

  8. #8
    CC Grandmaster Desmond's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    The island
    Posts
    13,260
    Quote Originally Posted by Pierre Dénommée View Post
    This site has many examples of bad resignations that could not be penalised unless the arbiter can prove that the game has been arranged because it is not possible to infer the arrangement from the resignation itself. https://chess24.com/en/read/news/the...a-won-position
    Some very amusing desperado tactics there
    So what's your excuse? To run like the devil's chasing you.

    See you in another life, brotha.

  9. #9
    CC FIDE Master
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Christchurch, New Zealand
    Posts
    563
    Quote Originally Posted by Pierre Dénommée View Post
    The arbiter should never immediately conclude that a lack of judgement when resigning is an arranged match. The Quebec Chess Federation did publish many positions that were resigned in actual play despite the fact that there was no valid reason to do so. The funniest situation was the resignation of a player who believed that a back row mate was unavoidable but who had failed to realised that his opponent's king was in check, thus making the checkmating move illegal. If the player had let the opponent deliver checkmate with an illegal move, this checkmate would have been declared null and void.

    This site has many examples of bad resignations that could not be penalised unless the arbiter can prove that the game has been arranged because it is not possible to infer the arrangement from the resignation itself. https://chess24.com/en/read/news/the...a-won-position

    Resignation of a won position is not so rare, arranged games that can be penalised are extremely rare.

    Arbiters must be very careful when declaring that a game has been arranged because such decision may have a huge impact on the honour and the reputation of the players involved. Furthermore, most National Federations and local Leagues will suspend the guilty persons.


    There is a big difference between resigning a winning position because a player doesn't realise it's winning for some reason, and resigning a position which can't be lost through any series of legal moves.

    An arbiter is well within their rights to start an investigation in the latter. Are you seriously suggesting that a resignation by a player with a King and Queen vs a lone King should not be investigated? Even if it's just asking the question "why did you resign?"
    IA Craig Hall

    www.chess.org.nz - Canterbury Chess Club
    http://respectrum.nz - Major sponsor

  10. #10
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by Craig_Hall View Post
    Are you seriously suggesting that a resignation by a player with a King and Queen vs a lone King should not be investigated? Even if it's just asking the question "why did you resign?"
    In this obvious case, the resignation must be investigated. it could be legal. If I had been playing a game of chess when I was notified that my father is dying, I would have rushed to the hospital as I did regardless of the position on the board.

    The behaviour that you have described should be quite rare in Australia because you are using the Glicko rating system. The player's motivation is usually to lower his rating in order to take part in a future event in a lower division, such as U2000 for example. Locally, in most tournaments, a player who have achieved a maximum rating of more then 100 points above a section limit is not allowed to play in this section. For example, if a player had at a certain time a rating above 2100, he will be denied registration in the U2000 section irrespective of his current rating. Some players try to control the growth of their rating with intentional defeats in order to be forever eligible for a section such as U2000. The Quebec chess Federation will usually permanently forbid such players from playing in the section that they are aiming at. One player has forced to play only in the Open Section (with the GM and IM ) for the rest of his life. Under the Glicko rating system, the rating of a player who deliberately loose many game to weak players in order to control his rating should soon be followed by a "?" or "??", thus disqualifying the players from most prices.

    The player who resigned King and Queen vs a lone King would have to convince me that his resignation is justified by some special circumstances. Most reasonable special circumstances that I can think off would require the player to also withdraw from the tournament.

    There is another possibility that is unheard of outside of the United-States : the person who resigned has been threatened with a handgun. USA has lame firearm restriction laws, in 26 of the 50 United States, people are still allowed to walk the street with a handgun, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_c..._United_States .

  11. #11
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    38,920
    Quote Originally Posted by Pierre Dénommée View Post
    The behaviour that you have described should be quite rare in Australia because you are using the Glicko rating system. The player's motivation is usually to lower his rating in order to take part in a future event in a lower division, such as U2000 for example. Locally, in most tournaments, a player who have achieved a maximum rating of more then 100 points above a section limit is not allowed to play in this section. For example, if a player had at a certain time a rating above 2100, he will be denied registration in the U2000 section irrespective of his current rating. Some players try to control the growth of their rating with intentional defeats in order to be forever eligible for a section such as U2000. The Quebec chess Federation will usually permanently forbid such players from playing in the section that they are aiming at. One player has forced to play only in the Open Section (with the GM and IM ) for the rest of his life. Under the Glicko rating system, the rating of a player who deliberately loose many game to weak players in order to control his rating should soon be followed by a "?" or "??", thus disqualifying the players from most prices.
    It is somewhat off topic but I should mention the actual reason why this form of ratings sandbagging, notorious in the USA in particular, is pretty much a non-issue in Australia. It has nothing to do with Glicko. I've never heard of an organiser here limiting divisional/ratings prizes to exclude ? or ?? ratings or even "expired" ratings. Rather the reason is that the divisional/ratings prizes in Australia are not large enough to justify the effort. Some US events have ratings prizes in the tens of thousands of dollars - that's just asking for trouble. In Australia the largest such prize is usually for the Australian Reserves (Major), and this year first prize in that was AUD $1200. That's for a 12-day (one rest day) U2150 tournament with over 100 players - even if a player in it was really 2300 strength there is no guarantee they would win the event.

    (An expired Glicko rating in Australia, marked with an x, applies to a player with no rated games for a very long time. Expired ratings are still usable for pairings and ratings prize purposes but have little impact on a player's new rating once they become active again.)
    Moderation Requests: All requests for, comments about, or questions about moderation of any kind including thread changes must be posted in the Help and Feedback section and not on the thread in question. (Or by private message for routine changes or sensitive matters.)

    ACF Newsletter Information - All Australian players and administrators should subscribe and check each issue for relevant notices

    My psephology/politics site (token chess references only) : http://kevinbonham.blogspot.com.au/ Politics twitter feed https://twitter.com/kevinbonham

  12. #12
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (formerly Brisbane, and before that Wellington, NZ)
    Posts
    20,558
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Bonham View Post
    No, though in an unrated and low-level junior interschool tournament I had a situation of this kind once. One of the players had mating material and the other had only a king. The player with mating material was frustrated that she could not work out how to win and resigned. I explained that the worst that could happen to her was a draw and told the players to continue.
    What would happen in a rated tourney? If neither side can mate by any possible series of legal moves, it's an automatic draw, so the resignation happened after the game was over, so doesn't count (except maybe to Gijssen who thinks an illegal move after mate can lose). But if only the resigning player can't be mated by any possible series of legal moves, can he still lose? If so, that seems to be an anomaly.
    “The history of the 20th century is full of examples of countries that set out to redistribute wealth and ended up redistributing poverty.”
    “There’s no point blaming the tragedies of socialism on the flaws or corruption of particular leaders. Any system which allows some people to exercise unbridled power over others is an open invitation to abuse, whether that system is called slavery or socialism or something else.”—Thomas Sowell

  13. #13
    CC Grandmaster Adamski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Penrith, NSW
    Posts
    8,878
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Bonham View Post
    It is somewhat off topic but I should mention the actual reason why this form of ratings sandbagging, notorious in the USA in particular, is pretty much a non-issue in Australia. It has nothing to do with Glicko. I've never heard of an organiser here limiting divisional/ratings prizes to exclude ? or ?? ratings or even "expired" ratings. Rather the reason is that the divisional/ratings prizes in Australia are not large enough to justify the effort. Some US events have ratings prizes in the tens of thousands of dollars - that's just asking for trouble. In Australia the largest such prize is usually for the Australian Reserves (Major), and this year first prize in that was AUD $1200. That's for a 12-day (one rest day) U2150 tournament with over 100 players - even if a player in it was really 2300 strength there is no guarantee they would win the event.

    (An expired Glicko rating in Australia, marked with an x, applies to a player with no rated games for a very long time. Expired ratings are still usable for pairings and ratings prize purposes but have little impact on a player's new rating once they become active again.)
    No names, but there us a well known example of a NSW player who intentionally lost games to drop his rating below 1600
    It was to be eligible for a U1600 event with decent prize money. Repeat behaviour led to a temporary ban from playing in NSWCA run events. Such action is in my view appropriate.
    God exists. Short and to the point.

    Secretary of, and regularly arbiter at, Rooty Hill RSL Chess Club. See www.rootyhillchessclub.org.

    Psephological insight. "Controversial will only lose you votes. Courageous will lose you the election." Sir Humphrey Appleby on Yes Minister.

    Favorite movie line: Girl friend Cathy to Jack Ryan in "Sum of all Fears". "What kind of emergency does an historian have?".

  14. #14
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    38,920
    Quote Originally Posted by Adamski View Post
    No names, but there us a well known example of a NSW player who intentionally lost games to drop his rating below 1600
    It was to be eligible for a U1600 event with decent prize money. Repeat behaviour led to a temporary ban from playing in NSWCA run events. Such action is in my view appropriate.
    Thanks; think that's the first time I've ever heard of someone being sanctioned for it in Australia. A while back there was sometimes half-joking speculation that a few players were deliberately hovering just below 2000.
    Moderation Requests: All requests for, comments about, or questions about moderation of any kind including thread changes must be posted in the Help and Feedback section and not on the thread in question. (Or by private message for routine changes or sensitive matters.)

    ACF Newsletter Information - All Australian players and administrators should subscribe and check each issue for relevant notices

    My psephology/politics site (token chess references only) : http://kevinbonham.blogspot.com.au/ Politics twitter feed https://twitter.com/kevinbonham

  15. #15
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    6,132
    Why would a player who wanted to lower their rating by losing games wait until they had reached the blatantly obvious winning position of K+Q vs K and then resign? Surely they would have made a deliberate losing 'blunder' many moves earlier?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 40
    Last Post: 28-10-2010, 12:27 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •