I am realatively sure that if you had drawn the game throught perpetual check you would be on the other side. And their's nothing "cheap" about it. And it's not even easy to do; I won a tournament game because my opponent, perpetual checking me, missed a way that I could trade a night and queen and then promote and win. If you don't like perpetual checking, stop playing chess.
What do you feel about players that do perpetual checks when they are losing?
Sort:
I personally love how the opportunities for drawing affect the game of chess. Both stalemate and perpetual check are great ways in which an otherwise "lost" position can be saved. It really makes chess a game that is "not over until it is over" in the sense that even when you're winning by a landslide, you must still be wary of potential drawing threats.
On the other hand though, sometimes people "trying" for a draw can be quite annoying when there is no chance at one(such as hoping for a stalemate in K+QvK endgames in games with people rated higher than 1200), but I personally will usually carry a "lost" position along as long as I have a rook or some positional ideas that justify the continuation of the game(rooks seem to me to have very good chances at making perpetual check and/or stalemate options happen).
money won is twice as good as money earned-the color of money-get the right movie and the right quoted saying lol
Lol!
Worst bump ever.
richb8888 wrote:
money won is twice as good as money earned-the color of money-get the right movie and the right quoted saying lol
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0090863/quotes
The first one.
waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!
If it made you squeal like a pig all the more justification for him/her.
Is perpetual checks cheating?????
GollumForPresident wrote:
Is perpetual checks cheating?????
Absoltely no
Putting your opponent in check at all is generally considered bad sportsmanship
glamdring27 wrote:
Putting your opponent in check at all is generally considered bad sportsmanship
Hey! Stop waving that sword.
This isn't a serious question is it?
This thread should die. It WAS a serious question but OP realized last year the foolhardyness of his ways.
Agree
Brendanzeros wrote:
I am realatively sure that if you had drawn the game throught perpetual check you would be on the other side. And their's nothing "cheap" about it. And it's not even easy to do; I won a tournament game because my opponent, perpetual checking me, missed a way that I could trade a night and queen and then promote and win. If you don't like perpetual checking, stop playing chess.
Amen to that a thousand times.....
OK. Some of these forums and questions are for those who are neglecting their studies...off-task, distractions for those weaker players who don't like working to cover all the bases....check out the ratings of some of the commenters on the more inane questions and comments!!!!
glamdring27 wrote:
Putting your opponent in check at all is generally considered bad sportsmanship
WRONG!!!!!!
Where exactly did you learn that piece of misinformation? SHOW SOME DOCUMENTATION....
This is one of the dumbest threads I have seen. Even the title has bad grammer.
live with the rules or go away
Depends who is playing. When plebs like us play it does, not when Grandmasters play!