Opponents Who Won't Resign

I understand playing on in a losing position when you think your opponent might make a blunder. But when you're up a king and pawn versus a lone king, and announce that you have a force promotion in 5 moves, why (other than spite) would anybody play on?

But wait, that's not all. A couple of moves after queening, I announce a forced mate in 3, no resignation. Next move, I announce a forced mate in 2, no resignation. Next move, I announce a forced mate in 1 move, no response (I'm still waiting. It's been a couple of hours). Am I off base here? I thought it was common courtesy in these circumstances to simply resign?

Addendum: He dragged it out to the bitter end. For what purpose, it baffles me.

Internet common courtesy - oxymoron - case closed.

Some of my opponents are never resign, so I promote all my pawns to queens and corner him and avoiding stalemate

I'm not whining, just curious as to why someone would continue playing under these circumstances. I'd ask the same question if I saw somebody banging his head against a brick wall, "what's the point?"

Great idea! I'll have to use that tactic in the future. Unfortunately, in this game I only had one pawn. Thanks.

There is absolutely no obligation to resign any position. This is nothing to complain about, or be upset about. In order to win a game of Chess, you must deliver checkmate. That is the actual rule, not whether the opponent resigns or not. Resigning is an allowable courtesy, nothing more. If you're not prepared to play until actual checkmate, you shouldn't even be challenging human opponents. Instead, you should be studying, or playing against a chess engine.

Eh, isn't this too much gloating??  Just complete the checkmate as quickly as you can, without playing around.  The question is about why the losing player is extending the game. Well, why should the winning player extend the game?

I usually resign when it's hopeless, but in a situation like this I might play it out because I've been stalemated with a king and queen before.  It's possible; in this case, the opponent might be hoping for a blunder.  As has already been said, the object of the game is to checkmate.  It's an unncessary courtesy to resign before checkmate, either saving time for the winning side or an escape of the sorrow of continually playing in a losing position.

It is a two player game.  They have every much a right to continue to checkmate as you have for them to resign.  If you do not like playing to mate, you could resign once you got your winning position and be done with the game.  Otherwise quit your whining.  I play in OTB chess tournaments and am frequently the last one in the room before the end of the round.  

Sometimes the position is hopeless and you lose.  Sometimes the position is hopeless and your opponent makes one of the worst moves on the board because they get lazy in a winning position.  Like a marathon, you must FINISH the game to know who wins and who loses.  I do not recommend players below 1600 strength OTB to ever resign.  Trying to pick the best move even in lost positions is sometimes valuable to players of weaker strength.  

Course I am also a very odd player who in the Chicago class several years ago got yelled at by an old russian master.  I played 1.a4 as my first move as white and he was late to the round.  He came back into the room, shoved my pawn back and stated I had set up the board wrong (loud enough everyone in the room came over to look at what was going on since we were in the open).  He went on to lose that game and upon losing yelled out to me not to ever play that 'shit opening' again.  Much to the amusement of many in the room as they saw the beginning of the game due to his antics.  

Simply put, a game of chess is not just about you.  The other person gets to enjoy their game, much as you do yours.  If you dislike playing to mate, you probably picked the wrong game.  

Yesterday evening I had a decisive rook move, but a mouse slip put it on a square where it was hanging. I hadn't even enough time to cry, because in the same very second, my opponent had resigned !!
Needless to say that I'm not proud of this "victory" ...

I understand where you're coming from - I've lost many games where I've been a queen up because I lost on time and my opponent didn't resign. But at the same time, if you have a forced mate in three, just show it. If it's correspondence, just set up conditional moves, and if it's live chess, just use premoves.

Sometimes, people don't resign when they should, and other times, they resign when they shouldn't. Sometimes people just want to see the game through, and other times, they just want to irritate you.

My opponent had plenty of time to analyze the postions (time limit was one move per day). The game started on May 24th.

After my 66th move (see below), I announced, by appending a notation to my move, that I had a forced promotion in 5 moves. He did not respond (white to move).

After my 73rd move, I messaged that I had a forced mate in 3 moves.  He did not respond (white to move).

If I came off sounding "holier than thou" I apologize, it was not my intent. Since I've only been playing online chess for less than six months, and this was the first time I had encountered this situation online, I wanted to get your feedback. I realize he has the right to play on till the bitter end, I was just curious as to why, and if there was a proper ettiquette for these situations.

Interestingly, I had offered him a draw about 20 moves earlier, but he never responded. An subsequent error on his part allowed me to gain a tempo, which led to my victory.

I guess if you dislike playing for mate, Correspondence chess will be an exercise in (sado-)masochism or  a scandalous waste of your time,whichever way you want to look at it.For example,if you reach a position where 35 moves are needed for mate and each move takes 14 days,that translates into roughly 18 months (one and a half years). No wonder most people prefer blitz,rapid,standard, and even bullet..

if you're up a pawn and you can force promotion he can think about resigning. if you're up a KING and a pawn he's probably waiting to report the game  

Conditional moves help you save time in your particular situation as well

They think that they might be able to draw. Just had a game like this and my opponent even told me he had a lost position and was hoping for a draw (this was OTB).

they may some bad looser who try to get on your nerves by prolonging the game, or they may be desperatly hoping that you will loseo n time...

I had 28 hours to respond to his moves.

go into a game of chess knowing its more than winning on the board..you dont win until it finished and that can come via different ways...each player has the right to exercise their rights within the rules of the game and if it annoyes you having to wait for your win then thats what you will have to do.It is up to you how you react to your opponent actions and if you are getting upset by them not ending the game when you think its over then maybe they are infact not losing at all

Blitz chess +opponent who never resigns = fun     Correspondence chess + opponent who never resigns = ?    Please solve the above exercise (max 10 points)