Could of Won! Should of Won!

Guys, may we get back to the chess now ? ....

Lucky getting a draw there, theopenfile, your opponent should have seen that forced mate (it's straight out of a textbook) or did time pressure get the better of them ?

What's it called again ?  I seem to remember the name 'Philidor' or 'Lucena'.

Nf2+   Kg1
Nh3++ Kh1
Qg1#

Edit: Oops! I've got the colours reversed.

Yeh i was lucky! my opponent had plenty of time though so i guess he just did'nt see it!

I wasn't going to join into this topic, HOWEVER, I've decided to add my two cents worth.   BTW, the game was fun to watch, but why would anyone except a draw when it was a win.

Now, as for the word "learnt", used above.  The word, "learnt", has never been taught in the schools in the US, nor has it ever been accepted, same as would of, instead of would have. 

I would like to add my own opinion about how we personally change, using grammar and correct spelling on the internet.  First, I think what we have is a lack of reading from books that are mostly proofread to correct grammar mistakes,which reminds us  to use the words more wisely.

After being online for at least 10 years, my grammar and spelling isn't  as good as it use to.  Sometimes we adapt to surroundings, and just don't make a big deal about one word that is used by someone when we know it's NOT the right word.  Perhaps, I've learned to ignore the wrong usage of words because foreigners often are wrong, but I find it very rude to constantly correct them when they are already struggling to speak English!

I think someone may have been right above in a comment about shortcuts. Some ppl don't use helping verbs, so now I catch myself omitting words that I had always used before.  Why? I dunno!! :D  Timesavers!  I just don't think the internet is a place where someone is "bashed" or belittled for using the wrong word.  Perhaps a group called, "English posh and nothing else", should be formed, so the people who are always right 100% of the time can be with likeminded people.  

He agreed to a draw? He has a forced checkmate after 34...Nf2+ 35. Kg1 Nh3++

a) 36. Kf1 Qf2#

b) 36. Kh1 Qg1#

Can you please explain? I always assumed that if you are up trade down the board in general but be careful not to end up with insufficient material or a known draw. Which normally means trade pieces and not to many pawns no?

 Either way I personally find end games much easier for the winning player with the queens off the board otherwise he needs to worry about perpetual check or blundering into a mate or material loss. 

nswwsn, you are completely right!

Exchanging pawns is a different type of idea, mainly in an attack when you try to crush your opponent's king by trading his defensive pawns or when you are the defending side in an endgame.

There might be exceptions, but the general idea is to trade pieces. E.g. look @ theopenfiles game, lets say the position after move 29. ... Kf8. The only annoying piece for White is the black Queen; if White can exchange Queens, it will be an elementary win (King to center, safely push pawns, don't allow the knight to grab pawns (e.g. with defending important pawns/squares with your bishop) and get a Queen 1-0). If White could trade even Queens and his bishop vs the knight, it would be completely hopeless for Black. It does not make any sense @ all to try to trade the g- and h- pawns in this position allowing more checks...

Having said that 30.Qf4 would be my choice btw. After 30. ... Qxf4 31.Bxf4 Nd3 32.Bd6+ Kf7 33.b4 White doesn't even loose his b-pawn. Often this kind of trading strategy is not the computers favorite, but if it is safe, it helps humans a lot, because it drastically limits the enemy's resources of counterplay and you don't have to calculate that many possibilites of your opponent.

Have a good day!