I usually try to trade my queen.
When I play a 1000+ bot, I find it easier to trade the queen quickly.
Are people who exchange queens scared players?
Sort:
im a really low elo(700) and i think 3 pieces is better than a queen
magnabot wrote:
I have played so long on chess.com that I essentially have picked up on a common trait in most players and it is indeed cowardice.
The queen is the the most powerful piece on the board, by a long shot. It's not even close. So, what most players seem to have a view of is: get this scary piece off the board ...
I find with a lot of players, it's actually the opposite: they know how powerful the queen is, so they feel scared to exchange it away. "But it's my queen! I don't want to give it up!"
Nov 14, 2022
0
#126
thee_black_knight wrote:
1c0nIc wrote:
thee_black_knight wrote:
Trading queen's, when it doesn't gain you a piece or a very good advantage, is stupid and a sign that the players no good.
i would say the opposite is true tbh. not trading queens when it gives u an obvious advantage is a sign that the players no good
Did you read my comment correctly? You are saying the same thing. Not the opposite.
did you read our comments correctly? im saying that not trading queens when its a bad move can mean the players no good while it sounds like youre saying that trading queens when its a bad move can mean the players no good
Nov 14, 2022
0
#127
Allen314 wrote:
lol, if you're scared of losing your queen, don't risk it. I tend to trade queens if my opponent is cocky enough to threaten it. i think some people are over reliant on their queen...
cocky enough to "threaten" a queen trade? what do you mean?
Well, off the top of my head, I'd think of taking a pawn in the middle when it exposes a queen trade. Especially when that pawn trade was only opportunistic. If you're going to expose your queen thinking I'm afraid to lose my queen, most days I'll take the trade. I think cutting the apron strings once in a while helps me learn how to not be so reliant on the queen. Sometimes, it also exposes that the opponent was too reliant on it.
Doesn't this happen with other pieces too? Does op also get annoyed when someone trades rooks? Isn't he just upset about losing his favorite piece? Just because someone calls your bluff doesn't mean they did anything wrong.
Nov 21, 2022
0
#129
Anyone afraid of a chess piece needs to grow a pair.
Trading or keeping the queens on should only be related to the goal of the game: checkmate.
yep… it’s also wise to sac whenever it’s beneficial, but sadly I’ve noticed many withhold from them because they’re so concerned that lost piece, however by doing one or two you might just take the game. I’ve won plenty where I’ve sac’d pieces.
Nov 21, 2022
0
#131
TheBestBeer_Root wrote:
yep… it’s also wise to sac whenever it’s beneficial, but sadly I’ve noticed many withhold from them because they’re so concerned that lost piece, however by doing one or two you might just take the game. I’ve won plenty where I’ve sac’d pieces.
alternatively, they could just not be sure that the sacrifice is sound because they see a defense they don't know how to refute. its not like sacrificing is always a good move, i wouldnt call it "concern for the lost piece" to not sacrifice
You can have skills in chess without ever turning one page in any chessbook. FFA helps there.. But those puzzles can toy with you too.. lmao they have with me.. lol bust to 2,000 and then watch it continue to fluctuate makes one quickly view what’s offered to either attempt lol or say -k it. 😂
1c0nIc wrote:
TheBestBeer_Root wrote:
yep… it’s also wise to sac whenever it’s beneficial, but sadly I’ve noticed many withhold from them because they’re so concerned that lost piece, however by doing one or two you might just take the game. I’ve won plenty where I’ve sac’d pieces.
alternatively, they could just not be sure that the sacrifice is sound because they see a defense they don't know how to refute. its not like sacrificing is always a good move, i wouldnt call it "concern for the lost piece" to not sacrifice
Well, watching opponent pass by interesting sacrifices is my reason to say that.
Nov 21, 2022
0
#135
magnabot wrote:
I have played so long on chess.com that I essentially have picked up on a common trait in most players and it is indeed cowardice.
The queen is the the most powerful piece on the board, by a long shot. It's not even close. So, what most players seem to have a view of is: get this scary piece off the board, make sure your pawns are lines up and trudge and slag your way to a queen with your opponent queenless.
It is almost universally American to immediately try to get the queens off the board.
Your opponent seems to position threateningly with the queen? Race up to him queen to queen or better yet, check with queen supported by a pawn and simultaneously check the queen and in the forced exchange you have advanced a pawn toward becoming a queen.
I know most chess played are probably nerds and just this sheer yellow bellied mentality is just so apparent.
Kudos to all the chess champs out there with highly technical good reasons to exchange queens , but at the lower levels, it's just a race to create a glorified Checkers game with a race to get queened! It's pathetic really.
idk if ive already replied to this since ive been on this thread multiple times but this comment is so stupid lol
Nov 21, 2022
0
#136
TheBestBeer_Root wrote:
You can have skills in chess without ever turning one page in any chessbook. FFA helps there.. But those puzzles can toy with you too.. lmao they have with me.. lol bust to 2,000 and then watch it continue to fluctuate makes one quickly view what’s offered to either attempt lol or say -k it. 😂
FFA? Future Farmers of America?
One can learn a lot about chess from a chicken.
Fried Chicken = Hot Chess
DrSpudnik wrote:
Anyone afraid of a chess piece needs to grow a pair.
Trading or keeping the queens on should only be related to the goal of the game: checkmate.
I second this. Why is everyone here so intent on keeping queens on/off? The end goal is always checkmate and sometimes the best move will go either way. It's always position-dependent, never be too quick to keep them on/off.
DrSpudnik wrote:
TheBestBeer_Root wrote:
You can have skills in chess without ever turning one page in any chessbook. FFA helps there.. But those puzzles can toy with you too.. lmao they have with me.. lol bust to 2,000 and then watch it continue to fluctuate makes one quickly view what’s offered to either attempt lol or say -k it. 😂
FFA? Future Farmers of America?
One can learn a lot about chess from a chicken.
Free For All 4 Player Chess. https://www.chess.com/variants/4-player-chess , can be found in profile toolbar under Play. I also have a thread on it, here I’ll go get that link. 😂
….here you are: https://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-variants/what-boggles-my-mind-is-61297785 =)
Nov 25, 2022
0
#140
gigachadleb wrote:
DrSpudnik wrote:
Anyone afraid of a chess piece needs to grow a pair.
Trading or keeping the queens on should only be related to the goal of the game: checkmate.
I second this. Why is everyone here so intent on keeping queens on/off? The end goal is always checkmate and sometimes the best move will go either way. It's always position-dependent, never be too quick to keep them on/off.
Indeed it depends, but not necessarily on position. E.g. if trading queens allows me to win a pawn and quickly go into an endgame I will. To be honest you'd have to be pretty stupid if you didn't (unless there's quicker way to mate), since being up a pawn in en endgame will more than likely give you the win.
Trading queen's, when it doesn't gain you a piece or a very good advantage, is stupid and a sign that the players no good.
i would say the opposite is true tbh. not trading queens when it gives u an obvious advantage is a sign that the players no good
Did you read my comment correctly? You are saying the same thing. Not the opposite.