7-move Checkmate (Too funny)

17 months ago · Quote · #1
HumourlessBaboon

An epic fail... I can't believe it worked.
17 months ago · Quote · #2
notmtwain

That's not what most people would call a 7-move checkmate. It's just a 7 move game. I'll bet there are tens of thousands of games just like that in the chess.com database.

A "seven move checkmate", however, would be a series of moves which force mate. All variations would have to lead to mate in 7 moves or less. That would be extremely rare and might be worth a post. (You can probably find examples in the puzzle section.)

Otherwise, I hope you and your opponent learned something from the game.
17 months ago · Quote · #3
Tmb86

1) It's not very endearing to post a game with the sole purpose of having a communal laugh at your opponent's unfortunate choice of moves. Especially considering your opponents could do just the same to you with most of your games.

2) The threat of checkmate provided by the 'best move' of your game could have been parried with 6.Nd7

3) Perhaps you should consider longer time controls.
17 months ago · Quote · #4
HumourlessBaboon

Tmattb86 wrote:

1) It's not very endearing to post a game with the sole purpose of having a communal laugh at your opponent's unfortunate choice of moves. Especially considering your opponents could do just the same to you with most of your games.

2) The threat of checkmate provided by the 'best move' of your game could have been parried with 6.Nd7

3) Perhaps you should consider longer time controls.

1) My intention was not to laugh at my opponent. If it was, I would not have ommitted their name. I just thought it was an amusing game, with a result I could not believe worked. Yes, EVERYONE can be that single-minded at times, even you, I'm sure.

2) Not only would that move have had absolutely nothing to do with my pawn, which, if you fact-checked before you posted, was what I labled my best move, but I am perfectly aware that any and all of my moves except the first and last could have been parried.

3) My opponent chose all the game conditions. Also, how would you know what the time controls were? For all you know, it was an hour each.

It's always nice to recieve such polite and totally unagressive/passive agressive comments from people like you.
17 months ago · Quote · #5
HumourlessBaboon

notmtwain wrote:

That's not what most people would call a 7-move checkmate. It's just a 7 move game. I'll bet there are tens of thousands of games just like that in the chess.com database.

A "seven move checkmate", however, would be a series of moves which force mate. All variations would have to lead to mate in 7 moves or less. That would be extremely rare and might be worth a post. (You can probably find examples in the puzzle section.)

Otherwise, I hope you and your opponent learned something from the game.

Thanks for the comment. Yes, I learned something, and I hope it was at least interesting to see the game. Sorry, I should have called it "checkmate in 7," I do see the distinction. Thanks for commenting!

I mostly posted it because I thought the way the queen went from 1 to 6 was kinda cool...
17 months ago · Quote · #6
Tmb86

"Not only would that move have had absolutely nothing to do with my pawn"

By playing 6.Nd7 black both prevents checkmate and saves his knight. Meanwhile your rook is hanging, so your next move must be 7.Bf3. You are left with a broken kingside and an advanced pawn you will not be able to maintain.

"Also, how would you know what the time controls were? For all you know, it was an hour each."

Your games can easily be seen by anyone, this was a 1 minute game - which goes some way to explaining the amount of blunders. For instance if you'd had more time you might have noticed that 5.Ne2 or 5.Be3 kept your kingside in tact... not that it mattered in the game of course.

"It's always nice to recieve such polite and totally unagressive/passive agressive comments from people like you."

I don't really mean to be aggressive. But it slightly irritates me that everyone (myself included) feels the need to post wins more than losses. We all like to pat ourselves on the back. But i get especially irked reading the annotations of someone who won congratulating themselves on their every move. At our level, our wins our generally unimpressive and uninteresting because they are usually given to us by our opponents. We would all gain far more by posting and annotating our losses.
16 months ago · Quote · #7
erikido23

Nice quick win.....

But, after 5....bxd6 instead of qxb2 then black may be slightly preferable(although its probably =)
16 months ago · Quote · #8
NimzoRoy

For $13, (less than a movie ticket & big tub of popcorn) you could buy Chernev's 1000 Best Short Game of Chess, which will keep you entertained for quite awhile

http://www.amazon.com/1000-Best-Short-Games-Chess/dp/0671538012
16 months ago · Quote · #9
HumourlessBaboon

chrisr2212 wrote:

Haha! very nice. Many players would have considered 5 Be3 or Ne2 or Qe2 but you cleverly disguised your idea and it paid off! Congratulations, you play poker too?

No, I don't...I'm no good at face to face bluffing.