Jon Speelman: Keeping the king upright

by Jonathan Speelman
6/2/2025 – Premature resignation in chess has long been a subject of debate, and recent events have brought it back into focus. Hikaru Nakamura's resignation against Magnus Carlsen in a winning position sparked discussion about etiquette, pressure and online play. While resignation is often appropriate, even expected, history shows many cases where players have walked away from drawn or even winning positions. A look at some notable examples highlights the fine line between prudence and error. | Photo: chess.com / Thomas Tischio

Winning starts with what you know
The new version 18 offers completely new possibilities for chess training and analysis: playing style analysis, search for strategic themes, access to 6 billion Lichess games, player preparation by matching Lichess games, download Chess.com games with built-in API, built-in cloud engine and much more.

Sparing unnecessary suffering

[Note that Jon Speelman also looks at the content of the article in video format, here embedded at the end of the article.]

When people start playing chess, everything is rather confused and the conversion of an advantage fraught with danger, so that resignation by the losing side is neither necessary nor necessarily a good idea.

Later on, things become much clearer and there are positions in which it really is best to resign and spare oneself unnecessary suffering, even if one time in a million the opponent might have messed it up

Indeed resignation is part of chess etiquette and I really feel that people should do so, though there are exceptions - even if they become excellent, young kids may well not want to resign till they're 9 or 10 years old, and even if a position is lost, as long as there is any hope or you can see any tricks, then you should definitely carry on. The etiquette has also been affected by online play, and I must say, not necessarily for the better.

I'm writing this in the context of the imbroglio on another platform in which Hikaru Nakamura resigned a rapidplay game against Magnus Carlsen in a position which turned out not only not to be lost but to be demonstrably winning!

Nakamura v. Carlsen - Champions Chess Tour 2025

After Carlsen played 32...Bg4, Nakamura thought for only a few seconds before resigning, even though he had about three minutes on his clock.

Later he described it as "the Carlsen effect", and it was lucky for Carlsen that after starting his combination five moves earlier he hadn't seen the refutation because, if he had, he might have paused before playing ...Bg4, which would surely have transmitted itself to Nakamura even in a virtual game.

Apparently Carlsen put the engine on after the game was over and had a big shock when it went beep and told him 33.Rfg3!, so he wasn't bluffing but, in principle, even if he had seen the refutation beforehand then, given that nothing else was going to work, it would have been best to bash the move out anyway.

Magnus Carlsen

Magnus Carlsen | Photo: chess.com / Maria Emelianova

Over the years, there have been many instances of misguided resignations in drawn or even winning positions, and I thought that we'd look at a few more today, starting with an old chestnut:

Ignatz von Popiel v. Georg Marco - Monte Carlo (1902)

After 36.Rd1 Black resigned, believing that he was losing a piece, but there was a way out. The reason appears in the dynamic replayer at the end of the article.

Sztern v. Lundquist - Australia (1983)

In 1984, Murray Chandler, who was then editor (and I think proprietor) of the venerable British Chess Magazine, produced a one off shore spoof "Not the BCM". One item was a blunder of the year, and this was the winner chosen by a panel that included myself and Tony Miles, amongst others. Here Black offered a draw without playing his move and White quite rightly requested one.

After 28...Qxb2+! it's mate in three more moves: 29.Kxb2 Rb3+ 30.Ka1 Ra8+ 31.Ba6 Rxa6#, and forgetting that he'd been offered a draw, White resigned!

Deep Blue v. Garry Kasparov - New York (1997)

The next example is justly (in)famous as the best player on the planet faced by the very best computer not unreasonably believed it and resigned rather than trying for perpetual check. Of course, machines can analyse a vast distance and nowadays they are fearsomely accurate, but back in 1997 there was still much more subject to the "horizon effect" in which they "believed" that a line was clear too early and here it turns out that Black is, in fact, drawing!

Garry Kasparov, Deep Blue

Garry Kasparov facing Deep Blue in 1997

I can't remember resigning prematurely very often, but there was a London League game against the strong FIDE Master - he really ought to become an IM at some stage - Peter Sowray, in which faced with exchanging the last pair of rooks I resigned thinking that it was over, but subsequent analysis showed it should be drawn.

This was the position where I resigned - the rest of the game appears in the pgn too.

Peter Sowray v. Jon Speelman - London (2013)

Incidentally, I nearly forgot that as I write on Sunday, June 1st it's Nigel Short's sixtieth birthday, so Happy Birthday Nigel!

New ...
Open...
Share...
Layout...
Flip Board
Settings
MoveNResultEloPlayers
Replay and check the LiveBook here
1.Nf3 Nf6 2.g3 b6 3.Bg2 Bb7 4.d3 c5 5.e4 d6 6.0-0 g6 7.Ng5 h6 8.Nh3 Nc6 9.f4 e6 10.c3 Bg7 11.Qe2 0-0 12.g4 b5 13.g5 Nh7 14.gxh6 Bxh6 15.Qg4?! Inaccuracy. Nd2 was best. 15.Nd2 15...b4 16.Qg3 bxc3 17.bxc3 Ba6 18.Nd2 Qa5 19.Bb2? 19.Nc4 Qxc3 19...Qb5 19...Qb6! 20.Ba3 Bxd3 20.Nc4 Na5 21.Nxa5 Qxb2 22.c4 e5 23.f5 Qd2 24.fxg6 fxg6 25.Qxg6+ Kh8 26.Nb3?! Inaccuracy. Qxd6 was best. 26.Qxd6 Rg8 26...Qe3+? Mistake. Be3+ was best. 26...Be3+ 27.Kh1 Rg8 28.Qh5
28...Rxg2? 28...Raf8 29.Rxf8 Bxf8 30.Rf1 Bc8 31.Rf7 Bh6 32.Ng1 Bg4 33.Qh4 a5 34.Nxa5 29.Kxg2 Rg8+ 30.Kh1 Bc8 31.Rf3 Qe2 32.Rg1 Bg4
32...Bg4 33.Rfg3‼ Everything else loses! Rg5! 34.Qe8+ 34.Nc1 Bxh5 35.Nxe2 Rxg3 36.Nxg3 Bf3+ 37.Rg2+- 34...Rg8 35.Qf7 Bf4 35...Rf8 36.Rxg4 Qxg4 37.Qxf8+ 35...Rg7 36.Qf2 36.R3g2 36.Rxg4 Qxh2# 36...Rf8 36...Qf3 37.Nxf4 exf4 38.Nd2 37.Qxf8+ Nxf8 38.Rxe2 Bxe2 39.Nxf4 exf4 40.Nd2 40.Re1 Bxd3 41.Nd2 40...Bxd3 41.Rg5 Nd7 42.Rd5
0–1
  • Start an analysis engine:
  • Try maximizing the board:
  • Use the four cursor keys to replay the game. Make moves to analyse yourself.
  • Press Ctrl-B to rotate the board.
  • Drag the split bars between window panes.
  • Download&Clip PGN/GIF/FEN/QR Codes. Share the game.
  • Games viewed here will automatically be stored in your cloud clipboard (if you are logged in). Use the cloud clipboard also in ChessBase.
  • Create an account to access the games cloud.
WhiteEloWBlackEloBResYearECOEventRnd
Nakamura,H2734Carlsen,M28190–12025A052025 Champions Chess Tour Chesscom Class4.4
Ignatz von Popiel-Georg Marco-1–01902C41Monte Carlo1
Sztern-Lundquist-0–11983Australia
Comp Deep Blue-Kasparov,G27851–01997C93New York Man-Machine2
Sowray,P-Speelman,J-1–02013A00London League

Select an entry from the list to switch between games



From Mating with a queen; a rook; two bishops; a knight and a bishop; to the basics of pawn endgames – here you will gain the necessary know-how to turn your endgame advantages into victories!


Links


Jonathan Speelman, born in 1956, studied mathematics but became a professional chess player in 1977. He was a member of the English Olympic team from 1980–2006 and three times British Champion. He played twice in Candidates Tournaments, reaching the semi-final in 1989. He twice seconded a World Championship challenger: Nigel Short and then Viswanathan Anand against Garry Kasparov in London 1993 and New York 1995.
Discussion and Feedback Submit your feedback to the editors


We use cookies and comparable technologies to provide certain functions, to improve the user experience and to offer interest-oriented content. Depending on their intended use, analysis cookies and marketing cookies may be used in addition to technically required cookies. Here you can make detailed settings or revoke your consent (if necessary partially) with effect for the future. Further information can be found in our data protection declaration.