Why do people waste my time in classical?!

Now we all know about stalling as bad behaviour, but isn't playing on in a position being DOWN A QUEEN amongst 2000! players pretty much the same?! Why shouldn't such a behaviour be punished aswell? Why in the world would somebody be so rude and not grant the win and only resign when every last bit of hope is lost?

I do know WHY they do it - they hope for a blunder out of boredom and lack of concentration and more than often enough it also has happened to me that I started watching youtube, because the game was over decades ago. It is a valid argument to keep on playing in a let's say -2.5 position disadvantage, but not at -7! (in my opinion). Even if you would win it, would you be proud of a win like that? I don't understand how this behaviour is appreciated while stalling is the opposite when the two often clearly are so similar.

Now I of course did NOT report the players, as they have not broken any rules. I am just wondering if I am the only one thinking of this being childish and rude and should be stopped in some way as in the end nobody will be playing classical at all when this keeps going.

The last game I had was won at move 7. I was a full piece up on move 17. The game ended at move 33. Now it's not about the moves. It's about the time investment. 1 hour instead of 20 minutes. Why? I don't care that I got 99% accuracy at this. My life time is more valuable than a win.

I find time to do productive things when that happens, such as flossing my teeth. My dentist likes when people don't resign lost positions in classical.

@Le_Patzer83 but when I do other stuff I can't concentrate on the game anymore and then I would blunder. I am kind of forced to stay in the game to give my best. Sometimes I have even started bullet games while waiting for my opponent to decide between going for one or the other losing variation.

If your life time is more valuable than a win, just resign.

The truth is, even at 2000 level, people blunder completely winning positions quite often, and at all levels, there are people who care more about their rating than the game itself.

@Autofill said in #4:
> If your life time is more valuable than a win, just resign.
I thought about it, but then I could quit chess altogether when following this logic. Btw have also thought about that. But what I want to do is not quit chess, but quit playing against people who put rating over joy.

When you get opponents who play on in hopeless positions, keep your cool and play on till the endgame.That’s when the real fun begins, and you can start creating all sorts of cool shapes with your pawns - cubes, diamonds, rectangles, you name it! If artistic pawn shenanigans ain’t your thing, there’s always the option to go for the ultimate checkmate: mating with three bishops, knights or whatever that floats your boat.

@CheerUpChess-Youtube said in #1:
> I do know WHY they do it - they hope for a blunder out of boredom and lack of concentration and more than often enough it also has happened to me that I started watching youtube, because the game was over decades ago.

That's a perfectly valid reason to play on in my opinion. Just because you know you're winning, it doesn't mean you can just relax. I'm sure many a winning position has been blundered that way.

> It is a valid argument to keep on playing in a let's say -2.5 position disadvantage, but not at -7! (in my opinion).

Well, not all -7 positions are the same. Sure, most of the time it will be an easy win, but sometimes it's not so easy and very easy for the winning side to blunder a draw or even lose.

If they're down a queen with no compensation and you still have plenty of time on the clock, then sure, you could say it would be wise for them to resign. But as long as they're not taking hours on every move (which would probably be closer to stalling), I think it's ok to play on.

@CheerUpChess-Youtube said in #3:
> @Le_Patzer83 but when I do other stuff I can't concentrate on the game anymore and then I would blunder.

But if the position is such that it demands your full concentration, then doesn't it make sense for them to play on?

"ChAnGe CHeSs RuLEs! mAkE iT a WiN whEn eNgiNe giVes mE 3+!!!!". I mean, c'mon... and 2000 is not that good, it is not as if you were a Grandmaster or something. And even Grandmasters blunder.

@TeenageDimwit said in #7:
> When you get opponents who play on in hopeless positions, keep your cool and play on till the endgame.That’s when the real fun begins, and you can start creating all sorts of cool shapes with your pawns - cubes, diamonds, rectangles, you name it! If artistic pawn shenanigans ain’t your thing, there’s always the option to go for the ultimate checkmate: mating with three bishops, knights or whatever that floats your boat.