tfra11:It is good manners to resign a hopelessly lost game.  You've done all you can do to win at that point, and the rest of the game is just meaningless dice rolls.  There are many people who are annoyed at players who drag lost games out just for the sake of postponing the loss.

tfra11: I consider it very poor etiquette to continue in a game that has obviously been won by the other player.Besides,as a pawn with only 20 games to play at once wouldn't you be annoyed if a player waited until the last minute to play a pointless move in a game they could not win?

Carl: Okay, i guess things are different in other countries. I was raised to never quit, but if it's poor etiquette elsewhere, i can live with it.

tfra11: It is,nt poor etiquette. It is good manners to resign a game you cant possibly win.

tfra11: Ah. As I got it it is in your ratings advantage to finish the hopeless games sooner as the wins.

tfra11: Bad manners are bad manners regardless of where you were raised.

Carl: I don't agree. Here in the USA, if we quit, even if we're mathematically eliminated, we're called sore losers. I will continue to play all my games out to the end. Sorry if that's poor etiquette wherever you live. That being said, i do not wait until time almost runs out before i play again. I finish it right then and there.

tfra11: I'm pretty sure a majority of Americans who play here would disagree. (Only because of the MANY times over the years this subject has been brought up) Most people who care about this issue, I believe, feel it is rude to continue a game that is a mathematical loss. Americans included. But I think many don't care (whatever nationality)

Personally, I'm pretty easy going, and it doesn't bother me whichever way someone chooses to handle it. When I know I am playing someone who prefers you resign when you know for sure you have lost, I resign at that point. If I'm playing a friend, who likes to continue a conversation, and just play it out, I play it out.

i think nationality doesnt make a difference. culture might or the way someone has being raised by their parents (in any culture)

the main point is ... you are resigning as a favour for your opponent ... therefore its an good ethiquette to warn your opponent you will resign (or ask him if you can) unless you already know what your opponent wants

tfra11: "Here in the USA, if we quit, even if we're mathematically eliminated, we're called sore losers".What rubbish!Giving up graciously in a game you can not possibly win has nothing to do with being a sore loser.no matter what country you happen to be born in.One of the top backgammon players on this site (hello Alan) is an American citizen and he will always resign an obvious loss.

tfra11: Here in the USA, if we quit, even if we're mathematically eliminated, we're called sore losers.

That's why in America's national passtime, baseball, all 9 innings are always played fully (there's always a bottom of the 9th), and the World Series is always exactly 7 games. And it's easy to pick out the American chess players in tournaments - they always play until mated.

AbigailII: This is crazy.... I can agree that you can be considered a sore loser if you simply quit when you get behind, but to resign a game with no mathematical possibility to win, that is completely different.


Baseball, there is always a mathematical chance to win, and that is true for all sports. But a game like backgammon, there is a point when it is not finished, where one player has no mathematical chance to win.

Of course, here on Brainking, there is always a chance that someone can timeout, which is not a normal situation for games in general.

tfra11:I would say also that there is a difference between quitting and acknowledging the inevitable.  In backgammon in particular, I will resign only when I have no mathematical possibility of winning.  To resign earlier would be quitting.

I would go so far as to say that in other games, such as chess, you should resign a clearly lost position because to play on implies you don't think your opponent has the ability to play out the clear win.  Of course, the question whether a game is "clearly lost" requires some realistic evaluation of the opponent's ability.

alanback:Massacre Chess has this clear advantage that there are no "empty", endless moves ... you either capture or say goodbye ... however, everything can change in the last several moves when situation on the board looks badly ... so, play till the end ...

tfra11: Ever saw a Man mounted? Nay, never.

gogul: Ever man a mounted saw? Ay, forever.

Czuch: I have done some construction in my life, and I have personally manned a mounted saw, many times actually, but that is just me...