Conceding - A fine and legal way to waste people's time

[Da_Man]

I would like to hear you thoughts about the option of conceding games.

I have some bad experiences with it because, in my opinion (please respect it) some players like "********" just waste people's time by doing so.

What I find wrong is that, in the middle of a game, without any sort of explanation... just out of nowhere really... people concede the game and leave with no explanation whatsoever. Am I the only one that finds this behavior impolite?

To be honest, I don't mind the ranking points (yes, conceding gives your opponent the ELO points and the credit for the victory), I don't care about it... really I don't...I would just rather have fun and play a good game until the end.

There are players that when they see that they are losing, they just concede without notice and say: "It is a perfectly acceptable behavior and complies with the BGA rules". It might comply with the rules... yes. But do you do this in real life? Invite your friends for a board game and then when you are losing you just fold the board, pack your game and your stuff and leave? How ridiculous this is!

I would suggest, as it is done with the RedThumbs, to limit the amount of times that a player concedes the game. Or at least to limit the times that he concedes without asking the table administrator or the other player... to avoid waste people's time. Some people would rather finish their games, I think.

In addition, this rule could avoid people trolling other people (I might do that just to prove a point... I am sick and tired of people Conceding) and start a game just to concede later on. It is a perfectly fine, legal and acceptable way to (waste people's time) deal with the game isn't administrator?

[ringersoll]

First a few questions:

We're you winning when your opponent conceded?
Did your opponent have any reasonable chance of coming back and winning?

If a game is hopelessly lost, I have no problem with the losing player conceding. Yes, I would rather play than not play. But I don't enjoy playing a boring game which has already been decided. And I don't give or expect a request to my opponent to allow me to concede.

If on the other hand, the player concedes in a competitive game with no reason, then I would recommend avoiding this person in the future and/or giving a Red Thumb.
Due to situations beyond my control (phone call that I must take, a visitor at the door, wife arriving home early, etc.) I have occasionally been forced to concede a competitive game, but have always explained and apologized. (To do otherwise is just rude.)

To get into an argument is just an invitation for a Red Thumb. And as you have discovered, you cannot respond in kind.

BGA is here for fun. There is no need to argue. I have never given or received a Red Thumb. I just enjoy playing games!

[Da_Man]

Hi, Thanks for the reply. Here are the answers:

- It is hard to say when you are winning or not in Puerto Rico because the victory points of your opponents are only revealed after the end of the game.
- Yes, there was a chance for him to win because when he conceded, the end game result was 15 to 13 for me. Usually a game finishes with the winner hitting 40 to 60 points or more depending of the strategy.

Yes, I do agree that if the game is absolutely lost (or you have an urgent call, your wife arrived earlier and so on) it might be a good idea to say something like you are playing better (or I can't continue the game) and I will concede. But never just out of nowhere leave without an explanation.

My point with this forum is to know the other people's views about it and to know if people is having issues with it too.

I am basically being picked upon by the administrators for expressing my discontent with players that do this without giving any notice. Apparently expressing my opinion by saying that I would avoid such a player that does this is "defamatory", "rude" and "insulting". So yes, I am a devilkin now

But it is a funny icon

Anyway, hopefully with this forum people will understand that it is rude to just leave games without notice the admin will change a bit the rule to stop trolls abusing it and wasting people's time.

[glitter and doom]

It depends on a game. In pure abstract games, like Quoridor, Hive or Hex, it is perfectly normal to concede a game which has already been decided. In tournament played chess it is even considered rude not to concede (have you ever heard of Kasparov got checkmated?). In these games winner is often decided long before the end, and the final score is always the same: 1-0.

In Eurostyle games, like Hawaii, Puerto Rico or Tzolkin, things are bit different. Due to significant amount of randomness, luck and hidden information, it is much harder to predict the winner. And more important, many players want to see their score at the end of the game.

To be honest, it bothers me when my opponents concede Euros in the last round (one player conceded in the very last move; she could have finished the game in just one click). I don’t like it, but I don’t think it is a reason to give them a red thumb. And to call a player a bad loser just because he conceded a game is not a good behavior.

[Da_Man]

I will do another profile

Why are you banning me? For posting in a forum?

[Jest Phulin]

As with most behaviors, it depends on the situation. However, I tend to get annoyed when someone leaves (conceding or not) with no explanation. I think I'd also get annoyed if someone conceded on the last or nearly last move, when finishing the game would take about as long as conceding. These actions tend to invite red thumbs from me.

This is not to say I am against conceding. There are several games where one can get in a situation where the only way to win is to have the opponent make silly moves. In this case, I ask if a concession is acceptable, and generally expect the same. Even if the opponent expresses an interest to play it out to the end, it is acceptable, if they then quickly make moves that only advance to the end game position.

However, if a player insists on playing to the end, then takes their time making moves or makes moves that only try to enlarge the margin of victory, I consider them a rude player. A personal note or even a red thumb is likely to come after that. Case in point, the game Quorador. There was one game I played where my fastest path was 12 moves, and my opponent's longest path was 10 moves. I asked if they were willing to have me concede, and they replied they wanted to play it out. I was fine to this point. So, I started moving back and forth, so my moves were taking 3-4 seconds or so. They started placing more fences, to lengthen my path even more. This is rude behavior in my opinion.

Also, too, realize that there are several ways that are perfectly legal to play, but create unpleasant situations. Such things as setting a game to be on slow speed, and intentionally waiting until the last second to make the move when there may only be one legal move available. Or, constantly telling someone to hurry up and make a move, even if they have thinking time left. (Although this issue is addressed somewhere. FAQ or wiki or something like that. It is pointed out that this is rude behavior.) In any community, there will be some who are not compatible with others. There are also those that, for their own reasons, want to see others suffer. There is no way to avoid these conflicts. Report them (administrator and/or red thumb) and move on to the majority of people here who are fun to play with.

[Yuji_san]

Hi,
finally I found a post about how shitty you feel, when you are playing and someone just goes away without saying anything.
Seriously, if you can say "Hi, have fun" at the beginning, you can also say before conceding "Sorry, I guess, I´ll concede"
It´s a thing of manner! It´s like, omg, I´m loosing, I´ll go now. It´s not about winning or loosing, it´s about having fun, having someone, who plays a game, that you like to play!
When I´m playing and I know, the opponent is far better than me, I take this as gaining experience and showing the opponent respect, so I play to the end.
Of course I might be a little annoyed, that I´m not that good, but hey, that´s life.
A few days ago, I was playing Seasons and the opponent wanted to quit together, I asked why? and he said, he had to go.
A second later, he was playing at another table, which encouraged me to join the table and tell him, how to do it better next time.

ARghh! I want there to be a red thumb for being a jerk, a green thumb for being nice and a donno.. orange thumb for leaving without a word.

[Holmes108]

As others have said, in the right circumstances I think it's perfectly valid, and a very good option.

In other circumstances, it can certainly be impolite, but I see see no good way to implement any type of "smart" concede option, so I think we need to just take the bad with the good, as I wouldn't want to see them remove the option (as an aside, I've never used it myself).

A message saying "good game" or explaining your reason for conceding would always be welcome, but you can't regulate good manners.

[Zoorp]

To be honest, it bothers me when my opponents concede Euros in the last round (one player conceded in the very last move; she could have finished the game in just one click). I don’t like it, but I don’t think it is a reason to give them a red thumb. And to call a player a bad loser just because he conceded a game is not a good behavior.

That is very good point. Honestly I'm a big user of concede function, because I consider that a non suspense game is a boring game (even when I win, but I can't force other dudes to concede lol). When some people here talks about "wasted time", continue to play a dead game is a perfect definition of wasted time. Better to spare it to play other games (with suspense)


I'm ok when other concede, and I concede myself. I received an incredible amount of red thumbs for that (90% of mine) , yet each time, I did it with a explanation civil talk, I never ended a game without saying a word (that I agree, is rude)

But I persist, because it is NOT a universally wrong way to play. And that's the big big problem with concede intolerance. I can accept than people dosen't want to play with conceding people. But for this, personal note exists. It's a wrong way to put red thumbs for a reason that disturbs you but not all players. For example I hate starvation strategy in Stone Age, but I don't use red thumbs for this, just personal notes.

And last point: even if you don"t care about elo, it's important to understand than CONCEDE and SAVAGE QUIT are not the same. Yes, one of the differences concerns registered result, elo, and so on (at least it was the difference before last BGA upgrade), but this not the only one.

CONCEDE is like shake hands with your opponent and tell him without anger: "good game, I'm dead"..
QUIT is like throwing the boardgame on the other's face and spitting on him because you're angry to lose. It's a huuuuuge difference, ans treating one like the other is certainly not well graduated and fair

[Liallan]

Interesting conversation, and this comes up occasionally on Yucata as well.

I have to agree with Burning Spear that continuing a lost game is what can be a waste of time, not the other way around.

I feel mixed on the topic. Everyone does have a different opinion on this and I agree that it's not a good reason to give a red thumb. Conceding is totally appropriate "gamesmanship" if one is obviously losing and there is no way to come back. As has been mentioned, it's done in Chess all the time. While it is polite to at least say something (good game, I concede or whatever), on Yucata people do it without saying anything at all. (Of course, that's all turn-based and we have to get into our completed games and open them back up to see the chat.) I guess I'm used to that so it doesn't bother me.

Usually I prefer finishing the game, just for the sake of playing it, because I like to see the final score, or if I'm the loser, see if I can lose less badly or whatever. But it's also not the biggest deal to concede. (Though I agree that doing it one or two moves from the end, when finishing would have been simple, seems a bit weird. Several moves from the end seems more appropriate.) On the other hand, if finishing up the game is just a formality and starts to get boring, I kinda wish someone would concede, probably especially true with abstracts. (I did say I'm mixed on the topic. )

That said, it is rather odd when someone concedes when the outcome is unknown, or in the middle of the game. This doesn't really upset me, though - I just find it odd and wonder what happened. I have often thought it was a misclick. In fact, when someone makes an incredible stupid move (an otherwise good player), I also tend to assume there was a misclick. So I sort of just shrug these oddities off.

I think you have a right to post about it and see what people think. But I'm not sure I go along with reporting everyone who does it - I just don't think it's all that important. If I were an admin I'd probably feel like this was a waste of my time.