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...

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

Gosh the drugs must be extra strong today

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

AbigailII: Right. divide again by 8.

rod03801: It was more than simply an inaccurate generalization, it was flat out a misrepresentation

Czuch: Well whatever, lol. I wasn't thinking it all the way out. Her point still was that games aren't played out all the way, if they don't need to be.

If you haven't read the whole thread, you will see where she is coming from, if you do.

I'm as American as any other American, and I have certainly resigned games that are mathematically impossible for me to win, and I feel comfortable saying that probably most others do as well. It was an inaccurate generalization on the part of tfra11.

rod03801: I think you have it backwards.... in baseball, the game will end if there is no mathematical way for the home team to lose!

rod03801: Dang that was fast. Triple play and next inning

awesome: Right, her point was that in baseball (considered the "American sport") games DO end when there is no mathematical way for the team to win. This was in response to tfra11 who is trying to say that it is "UnAmerican" to resign a game that is definitely lost.

She made an excellent point.

pauloaguia: And Baseball is awesome

awesome: I think she was being ironic...

rabbitoid: That number doesn't consider reflections or rotations.

AbigailII: you must not watch much baseball, you are wrong on both the points you are trying to make and using baseball as an example...

...1. the bottom of the 9th is NOT always played if the home team has the lead after the top of the 9th !!!

2. the World Series is a best of 7...the first to 4 wins wins...they DO NOT always play 7 games !!!!

Herlock Sholmes:
the right formula is 64! / ((8!)^8) = 1,816572393163080675696402792818e+52 which is still more than the amount of cents I have in my bank account.

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.

Resher: It wasn't my calculation ... it was done by a mathematician ... maybe he was wrong, I don't know..

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.

Herlock Sholmes:That would be the case if all 64 pieces were unique, but they're not here.  I haven't got time now to come up with what I think is the right answer, but it will be lower than (8^57)x 7! = 1.5 x 10^55

Speaking with games, the cube decision seems to fit in this drop/hold it discussion. Because if culture is involved, you like to take a look at the peak moment. It's like this comic: When you are at best with your girl you can consider to let a new love start growing from the bottom (j/k).

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.

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: 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.

Actually, I think this has at least as much to do with different game cultures as it has to do with nationalities. In chess, you will sometimes find yourself in a position where:

- you know you're lost
- you know your opponent has the skill to win the game
- but it will still take some 30-40 moves for them to do so.

I suppose that's why experienced chess players have developed this etiquette that you resign when you know you haven't got a chance (unless there's only a few moves left, in which case your opponent might actually be happy to mate you!). I've played chess with people from all over the world on many different sites, and I've never noticed that people from the US were any different in this regard.

The problem, I think, is when people take the game etiquette that they've learned at one game and apply it to a different game and expect it to be universally valid. Which is bound to happen now and then on a site like this. The solution, of course, is to try to tell yourself that whatever your opponent does, he probably means no harm... live and let live... and Fencer, please don't add any more achievements that requires the game to be played out to the end ;-)

ChessVariant: I agree that some stupid blunders are made, as I have made plenty of them myself. However, the kind of eliminations I am talking about are:

1. Chess Example: King vs. King + Rook. Please resign this game if you only have a king rather than make someone finish it.

2. Backgammon example: If you can see that a player will win if he rolls all 2-1 for the remainder of the game, even if the opponent rolls all double 6's, then it is pointless to continue. Only people who are praying for the winning opponent's computer to explode would keep playing this game.

tfra11: I disagree with the USA argument. Why do sports series end early if the other team is mathematically eliminated? (i.e. NBA: Lakers won 4-1 in a best of 7, and there was no need to play all seven). Even with Soccer (Futbol), if a game goes to a Penalty Kick shootout, all 5 kicks by each team are not taken if a team is mathematically eliminated before the 5th kick. With board games, I believe it is universally considered "good sportsmanship" to resign a lost cause.

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.

Czuch: Yeah, but personally I hate it when I win by timeout. It doesn't feel like a real victory.

If I realise I will lose the game in the next few moves I play it to the end. If I see I will lose but it'll take a long time I resign. What's the point of dragging a tournament just in case my opponent makes a stupid move or times out?

Carl: not true.... you can always win by a timeout too

awesome: Nobody ever won a game that was mathematically impossible to win either.

wetware:

I'm sure it's a personal thing and quite sportsmanlike but, nobody ever won a game by resigning....

Tuesday: Perhaps it's time I posed this question to my sports psychologist:
why are my 2 favorite sports/games (curling and chess) ones in which resignation in the face of virtually certain defeat is appropriate and expected (as opposed to the majority of contests--which are played until time expires, specific goals are reached, or a certain number of points are scored, etc.)?

I'm not sure it's merely a coincidence; this may be more a matter of temperament.

i usually play on my games until the very end .. although i sometimes already know there wont be a way for me to win anymore

the reason for that is that i like to get a feeling with the end stage of the games .. for example in backgammon i play it on till the end to see wether a gammon or backgammon would be won or what the consequences of the positions would .. and how my opponent handles the end stage

the same for chess games .. i am not a good chess player .. therefore i play it on to see how and end game can be played

in games like dice poker i resign when i am too many points behind .. the same for reversi where i can count out the number of pieces which we will both have in the end

though when i notice that my opponent can reach an achievement then i wont resign and play on
(for example the achievements in dice poker can only be obtained when you win the game and not when your opponent resigns ... so when my opponent has all the bonusses i do play it on till the last move)

i would consider it a bad manner if i would resign such a game .. if i really want to resign i send a message to my opponent if i can resign on the next move ..1 more move wont matter

its good manner and good etiquette do place yourself in your opponent position and think of what (s)he might prefer you to do .. then weigh it against your own wishes .. and make a good decision .. or discuss it with your opponent

There's something I really detest: You get a winning position against an opponent, you know you won, he knows you won, and instead of pressing the resign link he lets the time run out. Now that's asocial behaviour!

does anyone know hat has happened to Kardinal?
he is timing out in a lot of games and still has auto vac on .

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: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.

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

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

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

I resign a game that I too know Im going to lose so I don't waste time.. Isn't it still an achievement for the winner if I resign? I thought it was. it is still a win for them

tfra11: You want me to drag on a lost game for god knows how long, on the off chance that my opponent may get an archievement? Get real. If that's going to be the effect of archievements, I hope they'll disappear as soon as possible.

I play for as long as I think there's a realistic chance of archieving a result other than a loss. Otherwise, I resign. I'm here for the game play, not for pushing buttons or archievements.

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?

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.