Originally posted by BowmannOh nooooo!!!!!
As has been pointed out, this is correspondence chess. One shouldn't expect games to be over with in next to no time. If one prefers Blitz, one can play elsewhere.
I've been playing a game with a friend for over seven years now and it's very exciting. Particularly for me, since I've had a Passed Prawn since 2003.
Originally posted by WulebgrNo way is 2 years the standard in correspondence chess. No way. Not even close. Sincerely, Trains44
If you are not prepared to spend two years on a game, you should avoid correspondence chess. Two years is the standard.
Most people here, myself included, move way too fast.
I have another question corresponding to chess etiquete,as I take such matters quite seriously. Would it be bad etiquete to ask an opponent to resign in a hopelessly lost position, as if I am playing a 3/14 game and have a Q+K vs K endgame, should there be any reason why I cannot ask my opponent to resign to save me another month to force the mate so I can start a new game? (This is a theoretical question, not relating to any games I am playing at the moment).
Originally posted by welsharnieI myself find that playing on in a lost position is bad, but no you should'nt ask someone to resign. It's quite possible to play for a draw or a stalemate in a k+Q vs K game.
I have another question corresponding to chess etiquete,as I take such matters quite seriously. Would it be bad etiquete to ask an opponent to resign in a hopelessly lost position, as if I am playing a 3/14 game and have a Q+K vs K endgame, should there be any reason why I cannot ask my opponent to resign to save me another month to force the mate so I ca ...[text shortened]... ew game? (This is a theoretical question, not relating to any games I am playing at the moment).
I have been playing a game (not on redhotpawn) that started out: 1. e3 c6 2. e4 c5
I am playing the black pieces. Now my opponent played Ne2 which I think is generally regaurded as the best move in this position. But isn't it poor etiquette to play on after this hopeless position? Shouldn't he have just resigned?
Also, is it considered poor etiquette to always resign one move before checkmate?
Originally posted by bobbob1056thStop posting crap like this.
I have been playing a game (not on redhotpawn) that started out: 1. e3 c6 2. e4 c5
[fen]rnbqkbnr/pp1ppppp/8/2p5/4P3/8/PPPP1PPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq c6 0 2[/fen]
I am playing the black pieces. Now my opponent played Ne2 which I think is generally regaurded as the best move in this position. But isn't it poor etiquette to play on after this hopeless posit ...[text shortened]... t resigned?
Also, is it considered poor etiquette to always resign one move before checkmate?
This is not crap. Although I exaggerated, I was trying to make a point. And I have a legitimate question. I think it's rude to resign one move before checkmate, it doesn't let your opponent have the chance to end the game to a satifying conclusion. Since when have you been the redhotpawn forum police? And besides I can post crap if I would like, you shouldn't take it so personally.
Originally posted by bobbob1056thYou've asked before if you should stop with the pointless posts and threads. You didn't listen.
This is not crap. Although I exaggerated, I was trying to make a point. And I have a legitimate question. I think it's rude to resign one move before checkmate, it doesn't let your opponent have the chance to end the game to a satifying conclusion. Since when have you been the redhotpawn forum police? And besides I can post crap if I would like, you shouldn't take it so personally.
You post here has no point whatsoever. What was the thinking behind it? I know I'll post the Sicilian, claim the next move incorrectly and that'll make a point about resigning?
Say I am playing a game and I find a forced mate. I will point it out to the opponent and give some kind of comment on the game (where I think they made a mistake or perhaps a move that would have troubled me). I would much prefer they resign at that point. In most cases they do. That is a satifying conclusion to a game for me. Having to spend two weeks say playing through a RK vs. K endgame is not.
You know I used to believe that nonsubscribers should keep the right to post on these forums. You've now shaken this belief. Well done.
Originally posted by XanthosNZEndorsed, with a rec.
You've asked before if you should stop with the pointless posts and threads. You didn't listen.
You post here has no point whatsoever. What was the thinking behind it? I know I'll post the Sicilian, claim the next move incorrectly and that'll make a point about resigning?
Say I am playing a game and I find a forced mate. I will point it out to th ...[text shortened]... ribers should keep the right to post on these forums. You've now shaken this belief. Well done.
skeeter
What I meant is that it doesn't matter if a position is won or not, it should be played out to the end. Besides the reasons listed below, I think it's nice to have a game listed with as many moves as it takes to end in checkmate. Also if a low-rated chessplayer wants to review a complex game he may wonder why someone resigned because he can't see a mate/other forced win. Why would it be troublesome to play through a game that is easily won? I would think it wouldn't be a problem unless you are a non-subscriber (like me) and you can't start a new game because of it. If something like this ever happened to me I'd simply subscribe (I haven't found any real benefits to subscription for right now, although I probably will eventually.) There's always a chance the game can be drawn ie stalemate, 50 move rule, position repetition, blunder, time loss. Also if I do subscribe I wouldn't use this name, as I've apparently already ruined my reputation by wasting forum space (have I really been that annoying? I saw it as the forum wasn't very active and anything that I add could only be for the best, even if it was senseless.). Many users on this site seem very harsh, they seem to value their precious forum space over putting up with someone elses' harmless comments they find offensive. You have shaken my confidence (I think you would regaurd keeping your self-confidence as a higher priority than holding your belief (well apparently not mine(confidence))) And so what, I'm immature, only 17 years old, I grew up in a broken home ie my Mom and sister have struggled with mental illness before My parents have been divorced since I was about 1 or 2 years old my grandma who raised me my whole life died in a car accident my dog is getting old and not as playful (it really is sad to me) and I could go on but I don't care too much for sympathy, I'm just trying to make a good excuse, being kind enough to give you a reason (maybe it's not as bad as it sounds. I'm doing much better than one might think given the circumstances). I am, however, glad you give commentary on your games. And as for forum use being exclusive to members maybe it's a good idea; it'd make my decision to subscribe. And who knows, maybe after I eventually get around to making a new membership (of course, I would never tell you I'm the same guy as bobbob1056th) we could be friends (as I'm a decent chess player).
Originally posted by bobbob1056thMaking a second account is against the ToS and will get you banned if found out.
What I meant is that it doesn't matter if a position is won or not, it should be played out to the end. Besides the reasons listed below, I think it's nice to have a game listed with as many moves as it takes to end in checkmate. Also if a low-rated chessplayer wants to review a complex game he may wonder why someone resigned because he can't see a ...[text shortened]... tell you I'm the same guy as bobbob1056th) we could be friends (as I'm a decent chess player).
Originally posted by bobbob1056thAccounts can't be deleted.
What if I delete my current one?
I think when a less experienced player plays on in a hopeless position it is reasonable as you have to be able to assess that the position as certainly lost with no saving chances against a given opponent. It's when 1,500+ players do it in utterly lost positions that it is annoying, the only minimal material endgame you should continue in is K + N + B v K and that is because hardly anyone can do it.
I had one player carry on in a lost position in one game so that he could resign that simultaneously with offering me a draw in the other, I imagine he thought that this would make it more likely I'd accept. What would have made me likely to accept the draw offer was him not losing the opposition on the move he offered the draw...
Originally posted by DeepThought
Accounts can't be deleted.
I think when a less experienced player plays on in a hopeless position it is reasonable as you have to be able to assess that the position as certainly lost with no saving chances against a given opponent. It's when 1,500+ players do it in utterly lost positions that it is annoying, the only minimal material endgame you s ...[text shortened]... ly to accept the draw offer was him not losing the opposition on the move he offered the draw...
i am a 1400-1450 player and i quite often play on in a hopeless position. if i'm playing someone worse than me obviously i can hope they will make a stupid mistake and i can get a draw or stalemate. when i'm playing someone better than me, i learn a lot from seeing how they 'finish me off'. i'm not very good at endgames, and i often screw up when trying to convert a material advantage (even a large one) into a win. apologies to those who find this annoying, but i can't really see why it's SO annoying to have a few 'won' games going that you can finish off without thinking too hard about the moves. and it's useful for dunces like me 🙂