16090 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
I undestand that sometimes position is more important that one pawn, but after knight takes pawn white has to move rook since now knight is attacking it and also is attacking bishop, the position of that knigh in that square look very strong to me, also after the pawn Knight can take bishop that was in a very strong place. no to mention that pawn was protecting blacks knight which also can be taken with the bishop.
Spending a move capturing the Pawn on d6 is not really worth it because it is an isolated Pawn and because of that, it would have gotten captured eventually. When White moved the bishop to e3, it gained space by taking over that diagonal it was on. It also allowed the Pawn on f2 to move up to f4, kicking the Black Knight away from the strong post on e5.
The position that White had after those moves were worth more than taking that Pawn.
can someone explain to me why in move 23 white didn't do Qd6
I hope the diagram explains to you why White resigned. :)
blunder on move 21 for white
he shouldn't have resigned...... first he should have killed the Knight with his Rook and after we kill his Rook with our Bishop, he should kill the Bishop with his king...................... Then he can also kill the pawn with his bishop............. please comment for a better explanation................ thnx
very nice tanks
Nice Job Chess.com Members!!!
@ghillan I agree completely about resigning. In my book, it is disrespectful not to resign when you are totally lost. If you're a piece down or so it's fine to continue, but when it is lost like this I give props to Danny for resigning.
My chess coach advised me that when someone doesn't resign in an over the board tournament to just continue playing and utterly crush them. If they're going to waste your time, have fun with it.
@sireid: TNX TO POINT THAT OUT:
tnx to chess.com that made this match even possible!!!
@iixxPROxxii .. he could not cover the material difference. Black its ovliously winning.
In contrary as most people conseder. Resigning its not a lack of respect, its admitting that your hopponent played wel, so instead to hope for blunder you admit that he won. Much respect to IM DANNY for that
SOme people couls not agree , but whose are my 2 cents
Good game Danny! May I ask why you resigned?
ok, where's Anand ?
@IM DANNY: It was an honour to play against you......
Thanks for the game.
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2014 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!