Board Game Arena

Are there any situations in which conceding can be viewed as rude?

Never considered that before but actually I can imagine two situations:
1) conceding makes me feel like an ELO donor, used resource for boosting self confidence. When you see loss you just throw this game and me away from your life. I think none likes the feeling being used.
2) when I have made my best effort to play a stunning final and you just turn the show off

I also can imagine pathetic arguments like .conceding is deep respect to payers time, blablabla.

What situation had led to you asking this?

It's never rude to concede. If you feel like you've lost, and you don't want to finish, then you should concede and be done. It does not diminish the victory.

Forcing someone to complete a game when they feel like they are done, however: That's rude.

I don't think it's rude to concede. I wanted to in one of my battle sheep games because it was impossible for me to win and I didn't want to drag out the game unnecessarily; unfortunately, you can't concede in tournaments

Yeah, unfortunately in tourneys, where it's important to track not just the winner, but how many points they won by, conceding doesn't work. :/

Some will view conceding as rude and some will view not conceding as rude. It depends on who you ask.

By the sites rules, you are free to concede any 2 player game, so long as it has reached the 50% progress point.

Caffe Latte wrote:Never considered that before but actually I can imagine two situations:
1) conceding makes me feel like an ELO donor, used resource for boosting self confidence. When you see loss you just throw this game and me away from your life. I think none likes the feeling being used.
2) when I have made my best effort to play a stunning final and you just turn the show off

I also can imagine pathetic arguments like .conceding is deep respect to payers time, blablabla.

What situation had led to you asking this?

1) Mhm, dunno about the "ELO donor" part. If I concede then I'm about to lose anyway. and I think in most cases, it is obvious to my opponent. In both cases, I'm giving the same amount of ELO to my opponent. Albeit in less time, which is both profitable to my opponent and me. I am not sure if conceding compared to losing would lead to a bigger boost in self-confidence for my opponent.

"Throw this game and me away from your life" That's fair. It does have a couple of counterarguments against it. Debating on the amount of hospitality on the internet. I suppose it would differ from one person to another.

2) Yes, I can totally see that. I did this before

Not conceding in chess in a completely lost position is widely viewed as rude. I think it also depends on the game that is being played.

Also, the enjoyment that comes from a lot of games comes from experiencing the feeling of playing the game. Or the journey of trying to make a big tableau/army/combo etc... to win the game. This can be seen in Stone Age, Through the Ages, Porto Rico, Russian Railroads etc... Conceding the game early cuts the fun.

N_faker wrote:Some will view conceding as rude and some will view not conceding as rude.

That's fair, I think that applies to almost everything.

N_Faker wrote:Some will view conceding as rude and some will view not conceding as rude. It depends on who you ask.

This. I have seen this question asked time and time again, here and at other sites, and always there are opinions on both sides, and there probably always will be. Meaning there is no answer.

The one point of agreement I do sometimes see is that the best route if you want to concede is asking your opponent how they feel about, while explaining why you wish to concede. At least then you know how they feel. Another point of agreement I've seen is that conceding one or two turns before the end of the game is maybe a bit stupid. (i.e. at that point, why not just finish)

Probably depends a lot on the games one usually plays and how soon a win can / how "annoying" playing it out would end up being for the presumptive loser. Myself, as a player looking back on the games I played, I prefer people don't concede for a few reasons, most prominently the fact that there's no meaningful final score anymore. Depending on the game played, the score tells how close it really was, or how the game ended. It also gets harder to pick out a specific match from a pool of 1–0 "scores" than if they had ended regularly with varying scores. On top of this, the (club account) statistics usually better reflect what happened the more "proper" game finishes, so some folks might even feel robbed of helpful analysis chances here.

If you feel like it would be rude to continue after a certain point, perhaps even out of respect for your opponent who can only lose if they miss a move or make a mistake, asking about that in chat is a great way of eliminating bad feelings. If they're fine with you conceding, go ahead. If they would indeed have missed their path to victory otherwise, but now receive a message congratulating them on their win, they'll take another hard look and usually not miss the opportunity a second time