HELP, my endgame is horrible.

In general you played quite passively with your Queen 10. Qb3 is nice double attack, 26. Qe7+ forces mate, 35. Qb6+ is mate.

Don't be distracted by the side comments here.  (Although quite humorous to me atleast.)

sacrificing always gives an advantage ?

what if the person miscalculated the sacrifice ?

when i said "sacrifice", it was tongue-in-cheek.

surely this is the only website where you have to explain comments like that ?

It's ridiculous isn't it. It's like nobody on chess.com has heard of sarcasm.

Try www.chesstempo.com endgame puzzles.

True, not always an advantage.. but at least sacrifice it for a pawn! If you just move it onto a place where it can be taken without consequences its not really a sacrifice.

ElKitch had good intentions. No need for a derogatory response.

This may have been a joke game, but you never know. I bet it's not so obvious for total beginners when a pawn can capture a piece for example (like when the queen was on b4); they might just suddenly forget the pawn can move diagonally to capture, or at least it might not pop out at them. Beginners can do almost anything; when I was in my elementary school chess club I basically won in the same way white did here against all of my opponents. I hardly knew how to mate, (though I did know queen and king vs king ) but I figured if I made enough queens one would pop up somewhere, and it worked.

What about the rook that stopped one square short of taking the knight, only to go over to the middle of the board to be taken by a pawn? I don't think there's any 'may' about it, in the slim chance it exists it was definitely a joke game by the opponent. It's not just a beginner because the moves are far worse than just random, a lot are the designed worst moves on the board.

It's rather plausible. There really is a level of chess where you just don't know when your pieces are attacked. Such players I was able to beat pretty well, and I was certainly not even 1000.

A lot of the OP's live games tend to look like this one.

I was thinking the same thing. He wants to get rid of his queen as quickly as possible!

He's not wasting my time.  I am!

Ok, no more fighting. Since this has gone way off track, I think I should explain things. There are other chess websites were games can be played; this explains the game not being in my archive. Moreover, while this game may be thought of as a joke game, which I originally took as describing the gameplay of my opponent, and not the post, the game was indeed genuine as was my appeal. I admit, it was a terrible game; whether the other player was not taking the game seriously or was a legitimately bad player does not make a bit of difference as I was asking for advice and criticism of my checkmate attempts.

As for the reason I posted a game from another site. It is one of very few of my games that demonstrate so perfectly my difficulties and lack of knowledge; as I typically lose badly before even getting to this point in the game. The ones in my archive illustrate my inexperience and lack of knowledge in DIFFERENT areas. Please take comfort in knowing that I really do suck at chess, so the fact that I missed moves that were obvious to others does not necessarily show that I am intentionally wasting people’s time. Instead, it shows that I need improvement, so thank you all for your comments and criticism. I appreciate all of them and will consider them as I continue to explore this game.

Thank you all very much!

Sincere Regards,

Greg

Oh, p.s. scottrf, I didn't comment on your posts to my other topics, but I did read them and do appreciate you taking the time to offer your thoughts. I apologize if I seemed like I wasn't taking them to heart. I want to become a better player as it's no fun losing ALL the time. So, I hope you won't avoid replying in the future.  

Lol, oh and one more thing. Since everyone seems to be wondering why I didn't take the queen with my pawn, I didn't want to mess up my pawn structure and was prepared to take it with the knight. [welcome to my mixed up crazy world, lol]

Bump

if the Queen was taken, the consequences were that black would have been a Queen down and would have doubled white's b-pawns.

i guess your english teacher can give you some more examples of "consequence".

bring it on dudes!!  LOL

A doubled pawn is a consequence, but how much does it hurt white? -0.13 ? That is almost equal to 0 and its just giving away.

A good position can also be a consequence. In some cases just giving away  can be good, so that your pieces are in a better position (maybe a pawn is close to promote?). 

And another example of sacrificing with 'delayed advantage':

So you're saying you would capture the queen, even if you got doubled pawns?

Id double-pawn a queen anytime :) Unless it leads to mating!

Doubled pawns are not worth it just to gain a queen:

You blame that on the "double pawn weakness"?! 

I think the check/double attack is probably the culprit, but I'm just an amateur.

Bump.