I think it was a mistake for White to have offered a draw in the final position. Queen vs. two Bishops is a sufficiently large material advantage to guarantee a win with good play, particularly since there are still pawns on the board. After trading off Rooks, White should be able to win some pawns and promote one of his own.
Was it the right move to draw??
Sort:
Objectively, White is better.
BUT...
Here's a nice rule of thumb:
If you have to ask whether it was right to take the draw, you should have played on.
Here are the possible outcomes: The game ends in a draw later.
You end up winning.
You end up losing.
In all three cases, you will have learned something more about the game. If you lost, you can go back and try to discern whether the diagrammed position was drawn.
If you have to ask, you should play on.
IMHO --- without analyzing too much, my gut feeling is ...no! White has sufficient hardwear/exchange potential to be victorious .. due to the queen
White clearly had a lead over you but couldn't seem to develop his pieces. You could have taken advantage of this but obviously the rooks exchanging was the main problem and also the pawns were all in awkward positions. To be honest it would have been pretty difficult for you to pressurise white's king because of the defending rooks and I think he had the same problem. What I don't understand is why white didn't want to exchange rooks, he would have been in a very good position afterwards, using his a4 pawn and queen in the a-file to checkmate quickly using his other pawns to compromise your bishops, so I think it was pretty good to take a draw here when white still had so much left to play for
Thanks you guys for taking your time to look at the game and giving your views on it :) I very much appreciate it :)
Should I have played on and maybe tried for the win? Or was accepting the draw the right thing to do??