08 Oct 05
Originally posted by TRAINS44Not brainless at all. It's depressing to play a lost game. There's a slim chance your opponent may give it back to you and let you win or draw, but it won't feel like a good win. It'll feel like it was handed to you. There's no motivation for me to play on unless I have some chances. Usually if I give up a knight, it's for some form of compensation. If I blunder it away, expect a resignation.
What you are saying is brainless. A knight is all you lose and you give the game?? Play me, that should be an easy win for me. No chance at all of getting an equal or better piece later????? Play checkers, sonny. Sincerely, Trains44
Why do you think it'd be an easy win for you? It's really unlikely I'll blunder a piece against you. You shouldn't treat me like a chess juvinile when I have an equivalent rating to yours. Even if you don't agree with my philosophies...
08 Oct 05
Originally posted by ark13How the hell on God's earth can you call losing a knight, a lost game. Maaaybe a queen, YES, or even a rook, BUT a friggin knight?? Comon Ark13 a player of your status (rating) should know better. So, grandmaster's blunder away a piece and THEY come through with flying colors! Comon now ARK13..you DO KNOW BETTER, I MEAN YOU ARE A VERY HIGH RATED PLAYER and you didnt get there by playing backgammon. And what is this good win crap?? A win is a win and I couldnt give a shlt how, as long as the game was legit!!! And I know deep down, you agree. Sincerely, Trains44
Not brainless at all. It's depressing to play a lost game. There's a slim chance your opponent may give it back to you and let you win or draw, but it won't feel like a good win. It'll feel like it was handed to you. There's no motivation for me to play on unless I have some chances. Usually if I give up a knight, it's for some form of compensation. ...[text shortened]... ile when I have an equivalent rating to yours. Even if you don't agree with my philosophies...
08 Oct 05
Originally posted by ark13Tell that to a grandmaster, he'll laugh his a$$ off....for a lousy knight!! A lousy knight. Are you not good enough to win after losing a lousy knight??? having an almost a 1900 rating???? A friggin knight????? Are you telling me also if you played someone who's a 1350 and he took your knight, you'd resign??? Over a lousy knight, to a 1350 player?????? No chance to win?? Cause the 1350 took your knight?? Be real now ARK13, you DO know better, you do. Sincerely, Trains44
No it's not. A piece is an easily winning advantage. And resigning is good chess ettiquite, not bad. If I were his opponent, I certainly wouldn't want to play for another 30 moves to trade pieces into a winning endgame. There's no more interesting play left in the game.
08 Oct 05
Originally posted by TRAINS44I wouldn't resign to a 1350 who took my knight, but I'd resign to a 18 or 19 hundred who did. You probably have only a 10% chance of coming back and getting any kind of result. What's the point of hoping for a terrible error?
Tell that to a grandmaster, he'll laugh his a$$ off....for a lousy knight!! A lousy knight. Are you not good enough to win after losing a lousy knight??? having an almost a 1900 rating???? A friggin knight????? Are you telling me also if you played someone who's a 1350 and he took your knight, you'd resign??? Over a lousy knight, to a 1350 player?? ...[text shortened]... he 1350 took your knight?? Be real now ARK13, you DO know better, you do. Sincerely, Trains44
A GM would laugh his @ss off about someone who didn't resign for blundering a knight without compensation.
08 Oct 05
Originally posted by ark13Your last line is as wrong as a pawn, being able to move backwards.
I wouldn't resign to a 1350 who took my knight, but I'd resign to a 18 or 19 hundred who did. You probably have only a 10% chance of coming back and getting any kind of result. What's the point of hoping for a terrible error?
A GM would laugh his @ss off about someone who didn't resign for blundering a knight without compensation.
08 Oct 05
Originally posted by TRAINS44In any case, this debate just makes me want to play you a game next week if possible. I'll try desperately to get your knight so I can win!! Getting your knight, I guess is like putting you in checkmate, no?
Your last line is as wrong as a pawn, being able to move backwards.
08 Oct 05
Originally posted by TRAINS44If you really believe that you can hold a game when down a Knight, why not offer ark13 a game at Knight odds? Or you can offer me one if he's not interested.
In any case, this debate just makes me want to play you a game next week if possible. I'll try desperately to get your knight so I can win!! Getting your knight, I guess is like putting you in checkmate, no?
09 Oct 05
1 edit
just ran into this, and thought it to be somewhat related to this thread.
Kasparov in the beginning of the'Kasparov Teaches Chess': "How can one convince others of the correctness of the opinion of those who are amazed at the beauty of combinations and the logic of chess tactics; for whom a smart sacrifice of the queen in a lost game is a source pleasure, while a dull, forced game leaves them indifferent. For them chess is an art that brings happiness and makes leisure meaningful."
EDIT: and was it Alekhine? who said something like making the opponent pay with blood for every last move of a won game?
09 Oct 05
Originally posted by wormwood[Event "OTB"]
Kasparov in the beginning of the'Kasparov Teaches Chess': "How can one convince others of the correctness of the opinion of those who are amazed at the beauty of combinations and the logic of chess tactics; for whom a smart sacrifice of the queen in a lost game is a source pleasure, while a dull, forced game leaves them indifferent. For them chess is an art that brings happiness and makes leisure meaningful."
[Date "2005.02.26"]
[White "X"]
[Black "Ragnorak"]
[Result "1-0"]
1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 Nf6 3. Nf3 Nc6 4. g3 d5 5. b3 Be6 6. e3 Bd6 7. d3 Bb4 8. Bd2
dxc4 9. bxc4 Qd7 10. Ng5 O-O-O 11. Nxe6 Qxe6 12. Bg2 Bxc3 13. Bxc3 Qd6 14. Ke2
Rhe8 15. Qc2 h6 16. Rhd1 Kb8 17. Rab1 a5 18. Qa4 e4 19. dxe4 Nxe4 20. Bxe4 Rxe4
21. Rxd6 Rxd6 22. Bxg7 Nd4+ 23. Kd3 Nb3+ 24. Kxe4 Nc5+ 25. Kf4 Nxa4 26. h4 Rd2
27. f3 Rxa2 28. Bxh6 Rc2 29. e4 Rxc4 30. Rb5 b6 31. Rf5 Nc5 32. Rxf7 a4 33. Kf5
a3 34. h5 a2 35. Bg7 Nb3 36. Bb2 a1=Q 37. Bxa1 Nxa1 38. h6 Rc3 39. Kf4 1-0
After some shocking opening play by black (me), I was in a terrible position, with a fairly forced slaughter of my pieces if I played on in a predictable fashion from 18, so I decided to sac my queen and try to get counter play.
Through risky play combined with my opponents greediness, I achieved an even endgame, and would have won with 34...Nb3.
I really enjoyed that game, so I guess the point of my post is to validate Kasparov's quote.
D