Is Chess the Only Sport w/ Sore Losers Who Request Draws When Clearly Lost or Won't Resign?

Seriously,

You've got guys with like a single king and two immobile pawns and the winning player has like a Queen, two rooks, a knight, and six pawns...the opposing player requests a draw, refuses to resign, or won't move at all and lets the time run down.

Is there any other game/sport in the world where we see this kind of major sore loser behavior on a regular basis?  I don't see losing tennis players beg their opponent for a draw.  I don't see basketball players/teams refuse to in-bound the ball or move just because they're down lots of points, etc.

What gives with so many sore losers.  These people are so weak in mind.  Sports should teach you how to lose with grace and teach you life lessons about improving and learning from your mistakes.  Why can't people accept defeat with class?  Why do they ruin the remainder of the game for the winning player who played hard and smart to win?  This isn't just a few bad apples.  

It happens regularly in chess online.  You guys know it.  At least at these lower levels.  It's very common...hard to quantify...but maybe every 6th game or so?

Winning on time is a legitimate strategy.  I should have clarified that I was not talking about that.  I am assuming plenty of time to perform a clinical win.  

It's true anyone can still blunder or accidentally (or even be tricked into) stalemate a position, but when the "dodge"/refusal to graciously accept defeat is so obvious (such as having plenty of time and being down so much with a totally busted position), it's just insulting to the winning player to keep playing on like that - whether making moves and drawing it out or timing down.  

It wastes the other players' valuable time.  Time is one of the few things we can NEVER get back in life.  It is SUPER valuable.  If you cannot see how this is rude and ungracious and how it is reasonable for the clearly winning player to feel annoyed and cheated out of time and the respect of a victory through honorable resignation, then I'm not sure what to say in these situations.  

I know even super-GM pros will play out a losing position, but that is typically for the benefit of viewers (notwithstanding Ben Finegold's practice of always playing to the end, as he is a rarity) when there is a beautiful winning combination.  Even though they see the loss, some pros will play it out so the viewers (both live and those viewing via the move records later) can see how the position would unfold.  This is helpful for people later looking at the move history and the pros actually do these for good instructive and respectful reasons (they want their opponent who came up with a beautiful idea to get a chance to see it played over the board).  I have heard this said by a top pro giving a lecture at the St. Louis Chess Club.  But for instances where there is not a special idea, most people just resign out of respect and not wanting to waste people's time.

I think you probably know those situation I'm talking about, where it's a massive positional and material imbalance for one side and with plenty of time left and the opponent is just being a sore loser and dragging it out (the worst being when the also let the time run down on purpose).  ...You know this happens and you know people do it out of spite and being sore losers in their heart.  It happens frequently and it's the bane of a good chess experience.  

As for teams not quiting in sports when they're down, that's often becauase they can't per the rules of the game.  I would bet that they WOULD if the rules permitted it.  In basketball, they "quit" or "gracefully resign" by sending in bench players and taking their starters out (no one wants to see theier starters get injured too, while playing a lost game already) when the score has a huge gap.  That's essentially signalling surrender in the only way possible per the rules.  

I would suggest that the player who holds out is expending just as much of their own valuable time as you are of yours. He apparently sees some merit in doing so, you both signed up to play a game with a known time control and I still say it's not for you to demand that he resign because you want him to and you have better things to do than to finish the game you both started.  If you are so far ahead, just play it out and win. Don't underestimate the risk of accidental stalemate, though. Again, if he's just watching the clock run down without moving, I agree that's legal but rude and I wouldn't like it either. But if he's still making moves at a reasonable pace, why do you get to decide that he has to resign?

That the player is "hurting" him/herself too, by wasting time, is not an excuse to waste MY (or other people's) time, though, right?

It doesn't matter if the losing player is playing at a reasonable pace or if the rules allow it, because the act of continuing with an obviously lost position is a time-waster and hurts us both in terms of time lost.  Any "merit" to playing on is overrided by this fact, imo.

I'm not arguing over rules/allowability, but rather over morality (and etiquette, secondarily) at this point.

To be fair, I think if this option to play on and "stall" an inevitable loss, while refusing to resign in other sports were allowed, l think some people would do it too now that I think about it.  It's unique to chess in the sense that we have a resign feature to the game that other sports may not naturally have (I suppose someone could just not play play...or something like that, but they don't have it built into the rules).  I don't think chess player are necessarily "worse" than other sports players in this regard.  We just have the unique option to formally resign and immediately end a match that they may not have.  

The worst are sub 12,000 players in my experience. These guys just haven't got a clue about chess etiquette whatsoever. It sucks whenever my rating falls low enough that I have to start playing them again.

It's a typical rude behaviour of weak players. Get past the 1400 mark and you will rarely experience such problems.

Well, once I thought it was a draw, so I offered one, when it actually was a loss. He didn't accept it.

Well said, OP. You have class, which unfortunately is not possessed by every player you meet.

I am so looking forwards to breaking the 1400 rating so that I don't have to mix with all the riff-raff down here.