Pretty much both, there's no need to give up a piece in order to exchange queens. White's queen would be in a good position on g7, creating possible future threats, easy to withdraw if required, keeping pressure on black, and taking away possible squares for black's queen (one would not actually want to exchange pieces while being down that much on material - position is hopless anyway, but that's another matter), what next? Simply developing your next pieces creates more threats in natural way. It would be very difficult for black to castle now/put king into safety.
How to kill the trapped Queen
Sort:
manavendra wrote:
I am intrigued by some people's comment that what I posted is cheating. And i don't give a s**t as to what others think. I really I had to resort to cheating than there are a million other resources like chess engines, other chess websites, etc. There are people here who play just to kill their time and give no respect to anyone playing serious chess. I guess its time to move to other sites like chesstempo where such useless wicked things dont go on...
@ShyamGopal atleast i have courage to ask for help through clean means. I ran through your profile and saw you playing against a politically divided team of your own nation. Tells pretty much about you Tamils.
I haven't a clue why you would not think it was cheating to ask for advice on a game - a tournament game - that you are currently playing. And taking refuge in racist insults isn't going to make you look any better, either.
And, you know, if you think I'm a miserable chess fool then I suggest you compare my rating with yours. lol
Ease up guys, don't get your knickers all twisted, it's only chess, not world war 3. ;)
LongIslandMark wrote:
In my profession I'm an computer system analyst - the systems and how people use them.
I notice manavendra blitz rating is 300 points below his online/live rating. With a few random samples from folks with a similar Blitz rating (1057), there typically is less of a difference between the two. Makes one wonder how much, in the live/onlive games, something else is going on. Just enough help to win, but not so much to get rated too high? Not proof of course, but once caught as a cheat, people start to think badly of you.
Hard to use an engine effectively in Blitz, I think.
Why ask for "help" for a situtation where an engine would not focus on "revenge"? Makes one suspicious.
Very easy to use an engine in blitz and bullet. A person even made a video once since people didn't believe it. A simple script and the engine will read the moves right from the window and you set the engine to make moves within a second so it doesn't waste time. You likely wouldn't be the top players in the world but you'd still get an effective 2600 ish power engine with only a second or two per move. Enough to beat 99% of all internet players.
Obviously the OP was a cheat. However, I expect most online ratings to be higher than any live ratings because you can use game explorer and alaysis board so you'll end up with a good opening and no blunders.
Overall I find it best to not ever concern myself with if my opponent is cheating or not (and I've yet to have a game that looked at all like an engine was used). Internet rating is meaningless and every loss is a learning experience even if that loss came through cheating.
With all that said... the OP is pretty dumb to be so blatant about everything and then be angry about people calling it out.
ChessSponge wrote:
Obviously the OP was a cheat. However, I expect most online ratings to be higher than any live ratings because you can use game explorer and alaysis board so you'll end up with a good opening and no blunders.
Have you seen the game in question ? You call that a 'good opening' ?
I think, but I may be wrong, that the OP did not think it was cheating - despite the fact that the 'read before you post' indicates it and the title of the forum 'post your finished games'. But of course, his reaction is childish (and racist, by the way).
Irontiger wrote:
ChessSponge wrote:
Obviously the OP was a cheat. However, I expect most online ratings to be higher than any live ratings because you can use game explorer and alaysis board so you'll end up with a good opening and no blunders.
Have you seen the game in question ? You call that a 'good opening' ?
What you quoted says nothing about the opening used in the game of this post. It says why you should typically see online ratings being higher than live ratings and gives an example of how those resources help aka it tends to help people play the opening better.
ChessSponge wrote:
Irontiger wrote:
ChessSponge wrote:
Obviously the OP was a cheat. However, I expect most online ratings to be higher than any live ratings because you can use game explorer and alaysis board so you'll end up with a good opening and no blunders.
Have you seen the game in question ? You call that a 'good opening' ?
What you quoted says nothing about the opening used in the game of this post. It says why you should typically see online ratings being higher than live ratings and gives an example of how those resources help aka it tends to help people play the opening better.
I agree that generally speaking the ratings / opening play can be much higher in correspondance.
But, in that particular case, where the first two moves are blunders, let's say mistakes at the OP level (for memory : 1.e4 f5 2.exf5 d5 3.Qh4+, oops), it does not look like the OP studied extensively the position after them.
So it seems plausible (not sure at all) that the OP's rating difference is not due only to the ability to use such resources.
LongIslandMark wrote:
Personally, I don't see any point in cheating - what gratification can anyone take from winning anything (not just chess games) if it is not a personal accomplishment in a setting that expects that?
Well, since it happens over and over again, such points obviously aren't terribly important to a sizeable number of people.
LongIslandMark wrote:
@AndyClifton - I feel pity more than anger...
I feel both! 
LongIslandMark yazmış:
@AndyClifton - I feel pity more than anger and, like I said, I just don't understand it. On the plus side, I suspect the vast majority of players are honest. Those that are not, and are found out, get a lot of well-deserved negative attention.
This doesn't mean that if you can cheat and NOT FOUND OUT, it's ok! It's no fun not winning a game yourself, accomplishes nothing. For those ghost-like cheaters out there, please try the no-cheat way, it's fun!
LongIslandMark wrote:
@AndyClifton - I feel pity more than anger and, like I said, I just don't understand it. On the plus side, I suspect the vast majority of players are honest. Those that are not, and are found out, get a lot of well-deserved negative attention.
no they got tossed and then just open a new account. what would be neat, is if somehow chess.com could find a way to recognize the new accounts. I personally don't mind as I think it is the minority of people who cheat, although some claim otherwise. It will only help my game playing someone stronger. Plenty of times I've seen peoples game mysteriously collapse, almost like I was playing two different people. I can only assume that my opponent at some in these cases started making moves on his own and did not understand the why's of the position they were in..
Seraphimity wrote:
Plenty of times I've seen peoples game mysteriously collapse, almost like I was playing two different people. I can only assume that my opponent at some in these cases started making moves on his own and did not understand the why's of the position they were in..
Yes, I've seen it too - and I've been on the other side of the board too.
There are some people that just can't play endgames, there are some people that relax too much once they get a maybe winning position, they are some people that stop paying attention once they seem to be sure of the draw, etc. This does not indicate cheating at all.
RetiFan wrote:
For those ghost-like cheaters out there, please try the no-cheat way, it's fun!
Talk about a waste of breath (or keystrokes)...
The no-cheat way...sounds like a karate move in the first Karate Kid movie.
Irontiger wrote:
Seraphimity wrote:
Plenty of times I've seen peoples game mysteriously collapse, almost like I was playing two different people. I can only assume that my opponent at some in these cases started making moves on his own and did not understand the why's of the position they were in..
Yes, I've seen it too - and I've been on the other side of the board too.
There are some people that just can't play endgames, there are some people that relax too much once they get a maybe winning position, they are some people that stop paying attention once they seem to be sure of the draw, etc. This does not indicate cheating at all.
oh no absolutely I dig it, totally organic and occasionally even epic failure's unrelated to cheating! ;) I'm guilty of it myself at times.. I'm talking about this one kid, tercarte.. we played a few times and he was later acct. closed for cheating. and some others just by their attitude and sometimes you get series of moves that are like super strong and totally unexpect and relentless, and then its as if their 5 year old got online... Like I said I think cheating is for the most part rare here.
What do you think of these stats.. this guys a monster Online but then 1299 blitz with average opp 1146. No accusation at all just never seen stats like this before
Live Chess - Bullet
1143
| Highest: | 1299 (1/22/13) |
|---|---|
| Best Win: | 1440 (psaltic) |
| Avg. Opp.: | 1146 |
| Total Games: | 930 (501 W/ 420 L / 9 D) |
Live Chess - Blitz
1359
| Highest: | 1515 (6/4/12) |
|---|---|
| Best Win: | 1546 (ivandoca) |
| Avg. Opp.: | 1351 |
| Total Games: | 435 (223 W/ 198 L / 14 D) |
Live Chess - Standard
1712
| Highest: | 1712 (3/30/12) |
|---|---|
| Best Win: | 1632 (LegislatorX) |
| Avg. Opp.: | 1491 |
| Total Games: | 7 (5 W/ 2 L / 0 D) |
Seraphimity wrote:
Plenty of times I've seen peoples game mysteriously collapse, almost like I was playing two different people. I can only assume that my opponent at some in these cases started making moves on his own and did not understand the why's of the position they were in..
Yeah, I can remember that happening a couple of times to me (on my old account).
AndyClifton wrote:
Seraphimity wrote:
Plenty of times I've seen peoples game mysteriously collapse, almost like I was playing two different people. I can only assume that my opponent at some in these cases started making moves on his own and did not understand the why's of the position they were in..
Yeah, I can remember that happening a couple of times to me (on my old account).
my shocked look ~
Is this guy stupid to post his game and ask for help?
Some of us might have used our engines and what would have happened if we found a resource for him?
Abey madarchod bhaduve ki aulaad... tere ko itna marunga ki tatti kahan se karega aur khana kaha se khayega yeh sab samajh mein aa jayega beta.. abey bhosare ke dusare ke forum mein ungli kyun kar raha hai bey.. saale harami randi ka chora...
All very well for you to post that, but if you were hoping to get an answer on a board which is 99+% English-speaking...