03 Jun 08
Originally posted by patserxYou are right, a win is a win so I don't think it's cheap to keep playing. Losing a Queen early or something catastrophic of that nature is generally due to an absolute blunder assuming players of roughly equal strength. In this case your opponent is the one getting the cheap win. You blundered, so it's not completely unreasonable to hope that your opponent may 'return the favour' later on. Unlikely, perhaps, but so was the initial blunder that gave away the game. No need to feel guilty or cheap.
I don't understand why some people resign at the first sign of a loss. The reason most professional players resign after even a pawn advantage is that they can see the result of the game way before a person like me can. They can also better judge how their opponent is playing.
BUT
To me continuing to fight in an obviously lost position is just going for a cheap win. Although a win is a win.
Personally I've come back to win from a lost position (in a correspondence game amazingly enough). My opponent just couldn't execute and ended up blundering right back. Couldn't believe it myself.
Before resigning always ask yourself: if my opponent was playing Kasparov in this exact position, is there a 100% chance that he would win? If the answer is no, play on.
03 Jun 08
The way I look at it is whether or not you can turn the lose of a queen into an advantage. For instance, this game, I gave up my queen to capture two minor peices and a rook while letting my rooks pair up.
Game 4943635
However, there are games where I have lost my queen and was unable to come back.
It all depends on your confidence without your queen. Two rooks and beat a queen but it you just give her away, it makes your battle very difficult.
03 Jun 08
2 edits
Originally posted by slappy115Well, the premise of the thread is that you lose your queen due to a blunder, not willingly give it up in a favorable exchange of material. But I guess your post did give you a chance to show off your game. 😛
The way I look at it is whether or not you can turn the lose of a queen into an advantage. For instance, this game, I gave up my queen to capture two minor peices and a rook while letting my rooks pair up.
Game 4943635
However, there are games where I have lost my queen and was unable to come back.
It all depends on your confidence without ...[text shortened]... Two rooks and beat a queen but it you just give her away, it makes your battle very difficult.
Edit - OK, now that I look at your game again, I guess giving up the queen was a small blunder, so I guess I take back my smiley. But it's still not nearly as bad as losing the queen straight out.
03 Jun 08
Originally posted by patserxwell said, i think that covers it plus the blunder and/or stalemate scenario.
I don't understand why some people resign at the first sign of a loss. The reason most professional players resign after even a pawn advantage is that they can see the result of the game way before a person like me can. They can also better judge how their opponent is playing.
BUT
To me continuing to fight in an obviously lost position is just going for a cheap win. Although a win is a win.
03 Jun 08
2 edits
Originally posted by eldragonflyAs your chess knowledge is very poor most of these players will be able to beat you without using books/databases.
someone who feels it necessary to use a chess database or openings book to make their moves here. 😛
P.S. I remember there were one similar `expert` - User 318460 who claimed that "opening does not matter" and have been accused in cheating everyone who have beaten him with his opening crap. 😀
- Joined
- 28 Apr 08
- Moves
- 77310
06 Jun 08
I feel anyone that resigns in the middle game part of a match is just shameful. Resignations, in my opinion, are intended to end a game with an obvious definite outcome. I'll never resign unless were in an endgame and I'm down to two or less major pieces (regardless of what they are, even two knights against a queen.) If I'm down by a lot in the middle of a game, I might however try a sacrifce or play really agressive.
Besides, if you're trying to improve your game then what better practice is there than to fight from behind.
07 Jun 08
Originally posted by hany3Well put...I like it. 🙂
I feel anyone that resigns in the middle game part of a match is just shameful. Resignations, in my opinion, are intended to end a game with an obvious definite outcome. I'll never resign unless were in an endgame and I'm down to two or less major pieces (regardless of what they are, even two knights against a queen.) If I'm down by a lot in the middle of a ...[text shortened]... re trying to improve your game then what better practice is there than to fight from behind.
07 Jun 08
3 edits
Originally posted by hany3I feel anyone that resigns in the middle game part of a match is just shameful.
I feel anyone that resigns in the middle game part of a match is just shameful. Resignations, in my opinion, are intended to end a game with an obvious definite outcome. I'll never resign unless were in an endgame and I'm down to two or less major pieces (regardless of what they are, even two knights against a queen.) If I'm down by a lot in the middle of a ...[text shortened]... re trying to improve your game then what better practice is there than to fight from behind.`
I couldn't disagree more. What about a forced checkmate in the middlegame? That warrants resignation. Some games are not destined to reach the endgame at all.
Game 4994192 Is it really shameful for Black to resign here? How would you 'fight on' from this position? What would you hope to learn, other than the frustration of being ground down in a lost position?
And in Game 4593476, which I lost...Black is 'only' a pawn down, but just look at the position. White's Rooks have a death grip on the d-file, and Black's Queenside pieces have trouble even getting developed. Rather than go on trying to save the unsaveable [against an opponent who is clearly stronger than his 1700 provisional rating], I decided to concede the point. Again, what is to be learned by playing on here? The odds of White letting me off the hook were slim to none.
07 Jun 08
Originally posted by hany3Here is an OTB game where i resigned because my queen was lost...But it was not in the middlegame so i guess it's ok? 😛
I feel anyone that resigns in the middle game part of a match is just shameful.
I have black : 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Nxd4 Qh4?! 5.Nc3 Bb4 6.Be2 Nf6 7.00 00?? (Bxc3) 8.Nf5 1-0
My shortest competiton game!