Chess: Why don't they actually capture the king?

[glee]

@Jasmine

It’s a breech of etiquette and in very poor taste to even get to the point where your king would be captured on the very next move. Etiquette dictates that one resign as soon as an untenable position is reached which, unless the victim is a player south of 1,000 ELO points, should be several moves in advance of the coup de gras.

It might be a ‘breach of etiquette’, but it’s certainly not against the rules.
I repeat an example from above in the thread where a Grandmaster played on in a hopeless position (I was rated about 150 ELO below them)

@glee

In a tournament versus a grandmaster I was easily winning (after 4 hours of the 5 hour session.) I’d won a piece, then exchanged into a simple ending.
I was expecting a resignation, but the game continued for 20 minutes or so.
Then he resigned and explained “I was just waiting for my friend to finish his game so we could go for a meal together!”

An amusing example of a ‘breach of etiquette’ occurred in yet another game of mine v a Grandmaster. After being under pressure the whole game, I finally reached a drawn ending.
I promptly offered a draw.
The Grandmaster (who I knew well) paused, accepted the draw then said firmly 'You shouldn’t offer a (higher-rated) Grandmaster a draw - it’s their priviledge to make the offer."

[glee]

@Chronos

I suspect that, with reasonably skilled players, that game would end up as a draw, as both sides ended up with a small number of pieces that could just avoid each other indefinitely. If all you care about is keeping one rook or queen alive, it’s awfully difficult to force a capture of it.

Especially with opposite-coloured bishops!

[Sitnam]

Turns out that game is from A classic Chess puzzle.