Faking death can be used as a means of "giving up", but it's not the only use.
Being able to trick someone's senses, is useful, since it may allow for a surprise attack, such as by striking after they turn their back on what they thought was a corpse.
It's especially potent if they can't damage/kill the faker beyond a supposed corpse state.
Regarding
the boxing match comparison Cal posted : A real world boxing match isn't fought under SBA. It has rules, including ones such as "don't kill your opponent", & "you are able & allowed to surrender/forfeit".
Furthermore, the point of a sports match or duel is a show of skill in some specific aspect, like fisticuffs or use of handguns, etc.; The purpose is different.
I'd presume someone dying of a heart attack isn't really a win or a loss in a real boxing match because neither party was trying to kill one another, & there isn't that STRONG (At least, not especially direct.) a correlation between your ability to professionally box & your chances of experiencing cardiac arrest.
Whereas in a Vs Match, the goal is the defeat or removal, location-wise, of your opponent.
Characters don't give up/surrender in Vs Matches because SBA doesn't allow them to; They're not going to abandon the fight entirely for no reason.
But there's a difference between:
A. Leaving the fight, & through no deliberate/knowing actions of yours, your opponent has a heart attack 10 years later.
B. Fighting someone who has vulnerability to cardiac arrest as a weakness, the combatant learning of it, & being avoidant of the fight while trying to exploit that weakness.
To put it another way, we don't assume characters will die to natural causes that aren't things we know or have reasonable cause to believe they are a weakness.
It's reasonable for us debaters to suppose a person will die of old age if they've shown nothing to prevent that. Likewise, a combatant might assume an elderly human would die of old age, whether that assumption ends up being right or wrong.
But it's another thing for us to assume a combatant, when they're old, will contract leprosy or alzheimers or some other debilitating issue that kills them, unless there's something on their profile that gives us knowledge they will, or reasonable cause to believe they will.
Assuming someone will die of old age or other reasonable weaknesses their profile makes clear or provides basis for a strong case for the existence of is reasonable.
More reasonable than supposing they won't die of old age without evidence otherwise.
Actively exploiting that is a lose condition that can be assumed in debate, if the profile supports that. Just like if you need to breathe, you can be suffocated, drowned, buried alive, if you're light enough you can be thrown into space, etc.
And it might SOUND unreasonable for characters to continue fighting for days, weeks, months or years, but SBA says characters won't voluntarily give up, surrender, abandon the fight, etc. & are willing to kill.
Saying that they would abandon the fight, even if it's because of the duration, contradicts SBA, & after such a long time, some characters could think to try to engineer their opponent losing to natural causes.
