Wanton Destruction!

Please post games where one blunder (perhaps of a series) leads to rapid, utter, total wanton destruction. Think of this as chess porn, or a wall of shame for people who don't resign when they should. Here's one to start:

I did. For my opponent. Smartbutt.

I don't see how any of these replies are about wanton destruction/dominoes in chess. This post has nothing to do with ego: I'm hoping instead that people will post a contiguous series of material taken and/or checks. What does rating have anything to do with it? Rating is a hollow ego that strokes a number in certainly masturbatory fashion. Whatever.

You know what? Had you simply posted it as a game where you went "whee i win i win i win", folks would've laughed it off. But, genius, by making it something about "people not resigning when they should" and thus into an "idealogical" debate, you just drove your car right into the damn lake. Now all the glitterati will pooh pooh you while sipping their moral high ground wine.

L effin o l.

Off-topic flame.

Are you looking for rapid, utter, total wanton destruction?  Or just any part of rapid, utter, total wanton destruction?

Ibid.

Related comic: http://www.gocomics.com/pearlsbeforeswine/2014/07/01

You don't have to block me kaynight I've saved you a slot. I'm sure you'll find other people to block, and so need them. Cheers, dude.

Man, I TOTALLY misread the title:

Yeah. Don't hire ninjas to do your cooking.

Well, the definition of a massacre is very relative and has to take into account at least the rating of both players, not only their difference, and the ease of avoiding the blunders (if someone lost a piece by running into Tal's sacrifice, it was much less of a blunder than hanging it outright). What's acceptable for sub-1200 players is sometimes a no-no for tourney level ones.

So I'm gonna post a game where my 1700+ (in turn-based chess) opponent (who somehow beats 1600s on a regular basis) was guaranteed to be 'only' a rook down already at move 21, while his mistakes started as early as move 1. (This opening actually has a name - the Ross Gambit - but scores poorly and is likely unsound.)

I could have slaughtered Black faster, but I didn't want to spend much time on thinking moves through, was playing fast and safe because the victory was in my pocket anyway.

Seriously guys... So the OP posted a game that he won. So what? Is there some unwritten rule that people are only allowed to post games that they lose?

Moreover, internet chess is all about boosting the ego because big money can't be earned from the former directly (but can be earned indirectly through normalisation of the self-esteem that will help in other walks of life). Let people enjoy their won games.

9. Bc4!!is a sweet bait in your game. Thanks, coon74.

What is your obsession with the word massacre?

Haha, I guess the reason is that I'm too passive-aggressive irl. (Of course I use the word 'massacre' figuratively, as in taking chess pieces.) Also, competing in any sport at a decent level requires some hate for the opponent during the game, even if we're friends away from the board.