The best way to lose is as a gentleman with good humor and a handshake.
But why give up? Sure, his Queen is more powerful but why not play it out and learn some end game techniques? Besides, your opponent might blunder and lose the Queen in a trade or or lose her outright. And you could always try for a stalemate, not impossible.
Honour your opponent to let him mate you. Or maybe resign when it's evidently mate in X-moves. I would resign though in positions where it can take another boring 20 moves or so before he queens and mates you after that. Nobody can "learn" anything there and it's just annoying and maybe even disrespectfull.
So , show respect for your opponent and be a gentleman.
maybe, but probably not -- meaning, nope. if a game is LOST, then it's lost. nothing left to learn, but how to lose. respect is resigning when a game is lost.
Like Josie Wales said to gramma, "If you fight, you have a small chance to live. If you don't fight, you will surely die"....(or something like that).
IMO, don't continue play just to annoy your opponent. But if you're learning, or truly feel you have a remote outside chance, then play on without regard to how s/he feels....
....G Lola
what GM suggest playing a lost game to mate? i'm talking a lost game here. i understand that lots of players don't have the skill to know a lost game when they see one, but if they do? dude.
I think you owe it to your opponent to explain the meaning of "gg"... and then make some waffles.
The best way to lose is as a gentleman with good humor and a handshake.
But why give up? Sure, his Queen is more powerful but why not play it out and learn some end game techniques? Besides, your opponent might blunder and lose the Queen in a trade or or lose her outright. And you could always try for a stalemate, not impossible.
sure that is always possible, but it really irks me when I am up a queen and a knight, and I have 3 or 4 pawns and they have very little material.
Best way to deal with these situations is to give em a taste of their own medicine and promote to all knights or something... and when they ask why you aren't playing an obvious mate in 3, you say because you are wasting my time I will waste your's.
Well with QvsR, I would play on and be counting the moves. QvR is deceptively difficult to win with. Sounds like it might be easy, but it is not.
I have never been able to do it vs an engine with tablebases. The strongest player in my club (2200+ ACF) also admits that the ending is extremely difficult to master.
Resign only when you know your opponent can easily win from the position. If you don't know how to win it from the position, then play on!
Learn as much as you can from the loss.
Your answer is the best answer thanks for your time!
Define "lost game" though flags... I mean K vs KBN is "lost", but the technique of finishing that ending is very difficult and you can learn by playing on.
At the very least I would play on to see if my opponent knows exactly how to do it. Once it is clear that he knows the ending well, then I would resign. I would NEVER resign that endgame.
depends on your oponent's experience and ability and your eperience and ability. it also depends on what is at stake in the game. often resigning means the start of a new game. i feel like there's far more to be learned from a game that is NOT in a lost position. i alos understand that many chess players are waiting for their opponent to blunder out of good positions. that seems silly to me.
Q vs. R and KNB vs. K are easy to screw up and run into 50-move-rule issues. Even in GM vs. GM play they'll usually play out KNB vs. K until the superior side is 4-5 moves away from mate.
The best way to lose is as a gentleman with good humor and a handshake.
But why give up? Sure, his Queen is more powerful but why not play it out and learn some end game techniques? Besides, your opponent might blunder and lose the Queen in a trade or or lose her outright. And you could always try for a stalemate, not impossible.
sure that is always possible, but it really irks me when I am up a queen and a knight, and I have 3 or 4 pawns and they have very little material.
Best way to deal with these situations is to give em a taste of their own medicine and promote to all knights or something... and when they ask why you aren't playing an obvious mate in 3, you say because you are wasting my time I will waste your's.
Uh, I believe the question was what to do if one side has a Rook and the other a Queen and I was responding to that specific question. If he had said that one side had only a rook and the other a Queen, a Knight and 3 or 4 pawns I believe I would have answered the question differently.
I agree with BorgQueen. Very well stated!
Q vs. R and KNB vs. K are easy to screw up and run into 50-move-rule issues. Even in GM vs. GM play they'll usually play out KNB vs. K until the superior side is 4-5 moves away from mate.
this is fair. the game is not lost.
GeorgeNC wrote:
jetfighter13 wrote:
GeorgeNC wrote:
The best way to lose is as a gentleman with good humor and a handshake.
But why give up? Sure, his Queen is more powerful but why not play it out and learn some end game techniques? Besides, your opponent might blunder and lose the Queen in a trade or or lose her outright. And you could always try for a stalemate, not impossible.
sure that is always possible, but it really irks me when I am up a queen and a knight, and I have 3 or 4 pawns and they have very little material.
Best way to deal with these situations is to give em a taste of their own medicine and promote to all knights or something... and when they ask why you aren't playing an obvious mate in 3, you say because you are wasting my time I will waste your's.
Uh, I believe the question was what to do if one side has a Rook and the other a Queen and I was responding to that specific question. If he had said that one side had only a rook and the other a Queen, a Knight and 3 or 4 pawns I believe I would have answered the question differently.
I agree with BorgQueen. Very well stated!
OK I miss understood,my fault, but a QvR ending is very difficult to win, my weirdest ending was two rooks vs queen and bishop with pawns on both sides
I was wondering this for awhile and decided to get some answers! Let's say it's your black king and rook vs white king and queen. It's the endgame so you know a white win is inevidable. Should you let the player checkmate you or resign? What is the best way to lose? If you get checkmated will it look like you didn't see it coming or wanted white to win "fair and squere"? If you resign will it look like you are a coward or knew it was impossible to win? Please, tell me your answers! Thanks and have fun! -Kingdom_Hearts