I have an opponent who doesn't want to move or resign :(

The game is lost for black. For that not to happen white would need to make 2 or 3 really bad blunders. But that's very unlikely. Now, the guy has a rating close to 2000; obviously, he can see that the game is lost. Why won't he resign? Why won't he move? It's not like he hasn't had time to go over the game, since according to chess.com the guy is often online. I really dislike people with that attitude, people who try to punish you because they didn't play well.

There's no rule against being a douche, and chess is full of such "characters", with myself included. Get used to it or go play barbies like a lil sissy! XD

you can contact chess.com and the game will be judged and it then will be decided

It's not the first time for this.  It happens.  A mixture of ego bruising and a natural tendency to be annoying and ridicules.  I find the games I look like I'm losing in have a lot less appeal.  But I just force myself to move until it's pretty clear I'm not going to be able to make a draw, or see big mistakes or even helpful mistakes from the other guy.

But of course.  Play the game or drop it.  Don't play stall. That's pure Barabara     Strisand, BS.

I think he's talking about a CC game....

I agree with punk 

No it won't, unless it is the last game holding up an entire tournament, and even then their specified policy only deals with people who are delaying games by being on vacation.  Eo is complaining about a subject he knows fully well has been beaten to death 2 zillion times in the forums.

I disagree.  Short timed games are lame to me.  That's exactly why Chess.com gets so much traffic ,since people like playing postal style where you need not worry about making your moves super fast with super little thought against another guy who's not thinking very much either.  Like a little kid who has a short attention span and the patience of a chimp.  Oh and also, I think it's rather lame to consider that anyone who takes his deliberate time thinking about his moves is weak or slow thinking.  Maybe he's strong and normal thinking.  Maybe he doesn't like making half-witted moves where blunders are bound to happen.  I'm sure that lots of others who are greats in the game, masters and such, loath bullet style or speed chess conditions.  It's just not natual for everyone to like chess only a certain way.

Frankly if I never play another game of fast timed chess in my entire life it wouldn't bother me one little tiny bit.  It means I'm playing my better game against other guys who like playing thier better game, and who have a similar mindset.

Derek Jolly

You use that massive intellect to crush blitz opponents and be a paramedic? Wile E. Coyote, Super Genius. Why aren't you curing diseases or figuring out how to get us out of this recession?

He must be bored.

If he is within his time limit, nothing to do friend!

OMG why doesn't my opp resign?! Can't he simply accept his fate and succumb to my superiority?!?!

This is the world's biggest non-problem. Eventually, they have to move. And they move one step closer to doom every time. Some people are playing 300+ games at a time and just cycle through their list bit by bit until they have met all the time controls.

It is interesting that there is another school of thought that says "Never resign. Play till mate." This may be a case of the "Why don't they resign?" school playing one from the "play till mate" school.

Just play it out and enjoy the game.I find it weird that people are getting insulted with the whole taking their time (even if its a dead loss). You both agreed on the time controls.

therefore take this oppertunity to work on your end game and enjoy the fact its another victory. (even if its abit delayed)

What I do when I feel an opponent is completely lost is to start another game. If the opponent is in a hopelessly lost position it will only take a minute or so for you to respond to a move. In the meantime you will have started a (hopefully) more interesting game. Your opponent has every right to use his time as he sees fit, and a 'won' game is only won when a) he / she loses on time b) is checkmated or c) resigns.

I'd say his ploy worked, He's inside your head for this game and future games as well.

What I find irritating is that when the player is losing, and he just stops playing until the time runs out. I dunno what he's thinking when he's doing that, it's rude, inconsiderate, and a bad attitude. 

On the bright side, I win anyways :)

I absolutely hate when players who are clearly beaten just quick playing. The right thing to do is resign and get along with life but they don't. If they do this to me, it will be the last time that I willingly play the person

If a player feels that he/she still has a chance to win (I have beaten players when I had lost almost all of my pieces: I posted one of these games in the forums a while back,) by all means they should continue the game. But that does mean moving in a reasonable amount of time rather than letting thirty or more minutes roll off the clock in a live game or several days to months in a postal game.

Historically, time clocks were introduced to prevent some of these problems. But players like Staunton, Steinitz, Zukertort and Paulsen were notorious for the time between moves that they took. (Reference: See Chess History and Reminiscences by H. E. Bird) In fact, some players refused to play these players because of the game delays that would occur. In order to provide some sanity, chess clocks were introduced in to tournament play in 1883. This was not necessarily the perfect solution and the has been some evolution to improve chess time right up to the present time.

But nobody has been able to fully solve the problem between chess players being annoying and chess players' need for analysis. And there will be players that take advantage of this. I have given up on postal and correspondence chess for that reason. I also have decided that I really don't like the turn based format here at Chess.com either.

I do like the live tournament formatted games where you can take a few minutes to think about a position before making your play, though. Analysis is part of the game, I feel. I really have never gotten use to the "Blitz" or "Atomic" games you must move on instinct. While instinct and instant pattern recognition is also a part of the game, it should not be the only part of the game, IMHO. On the lower limit, 15 minute games are really near the edge between having the time to analyze and having to move on instinct.

So in conclusion, I advise players to play in the time limits they are comfortable with and to refuse to play players that seemingly use time to annoy within those time limits.

If you routinely find yourself with opponents in lost positions who use delay tactics, I suggest that you start playing shorter time controls.