There are plausible reasons for why people concede on their opponent's turn, here are two of them:
1. Sometimes, they are in a losing position, but there's one move that their opponent has to find, in order to win the game. So, conceding is like saying "Yeah, good job, you've found it, there's nothing more to be done here"
2. Sometimes, it is not obvious to their eyes that they've already lost, and it is only made obvious on their opponent's turn.
you already put thoughts on your moves next.
it is your turn now, while you're executing your actions they simply concede without mentioning anything.
If anything, it is just my opponent admitting that my moves are correct, and I don't have to waste time playing these moves to prove that this is going to win me the game.
they wasted your time for the whole game.
Um, no? you still get to play like 50 moves before that, just because you didn't get to play the winning move doesn't mean your time was wasted or anything, you still won. I don't understand this sentence, it just seems like an exaggeration to me. Unless you're talking about the case covered in the next quote. Then, again I don't think that they've "wasted your time for the whole game". That's an exaggeration.
I'd definitely agree that if the game was obviously lost for several moves, playing out until the final move and then conceding to deny the winning move is bad sportsmanship. It is a waste of time.
Not recognizing that you are in an obviously losing position is another matter....
Correct me if I'm wrong, but this is not an argument against conceding, it is an argument against "not conceding when lost, to waste time, and then conceding at the end to prevent opponent from scoring the winning move". Which is obviously a bad act of sportsmanship, can't disagree with that.
Worth noting, that conceding is only available in 2p games, and 2p games tend to have this element of gaining relative advantages over your opponent. So the element of having the "perfect tableau", or the "best finish", doesn't appear as much in 2p as it does in higher playcounts, where the gameplay shifts from "relative advantages" to "absolute advantages". Essentially 2p games are all about outplaying your opponent, while games with more players tend to be about doing the best with what you have. So, if the point of 2p games is to outplay your opponent, then conceding when you've been outplayed should be treated as an act of respect to your opponent. At least, that's what I think.
But, again, every player has the option to give a private red thumb to anyone for any type of play they don't like, so you can ensure you don't have to face that behavior from that same person again.
That is true, however, everyone has their own "bad days", and we're all human after all. So, maybe we should try not to be too judgmental on others for making a disagreeable play, in just one game. If you play with them multiple times and that behavior repeats, feel free to do so. Obviously everyone can do whatever they want with their private redthumbs.
