How to play a worse position?

"It's sometimes quite hard for me to see which pros are more desirable and which weaknesses acceptable."

Indeed, that's the problem in any chess position.

Oh?  I thought it was easy for you now that you played like houdini

It's his problem, not mine.

lol :)

Haha! 

Okay, waffle, we just have to play the best move, job done! :P

Not sure how to phrase this question.  Lately Im finding when Im in a position thats equal or slightly worse I more or less make moves hoping for my opponent to make a mistake.  I hate the idea of waiting for my opponent to simply slip up.  I wind up exchanging out minor pieces with the hope that Im first to the draw in a pawn endgame or that my opponent simply blunders.  Is this acceptable strategy?  

Acceptable for what?  A world championship match?  Hell no :)

In all seriousness read a middlegame/strategy themed book and then you'll be able to develop plans.  Going over master games of your openings gives good ideas too.  Endgame knowledge enhances middlegame planning / evaluations as well.

If you feel every move in a postionally inferior position is bad then you just RESIGN. But if you have ever won a game against a strong opponent who had you on the ropes but couldn"t put you away, it wasn't because you were playing BAD moves ! 

I was about to delete the question.  I've been bothered by a few wins lately where for a lack of better strategy I more or less waited for a mistake.  I suppose this is progress.  As alwasy waffle thanks for the tip, I do sometimes go over the Master games were my part opens appear.  

For what it's worth I played with no real plan or evaluation of the position until ~1600 USCF strength.  Before that I don't really know what I did... I guess I calculated a lot and tried not to blunder.  So really what you're doing is not at all wrong.  Make sure you're not losing any pieces, stay solid, and keep an eye out for blunders

...and wait for your opponent to make a mistake (lol)

Or he might die.  Or one of these days, the Mayans might be right.

what i do is defend we exepte on de

reading that part of your post made me grit my teeth..  I'm the one this applies to.  Its not that I get bored with an easy win and have no problem finishing the job.  Its the games where my opponent comes out with some whack open, or moves his queen 9 times in the first 11 moves hoping for lord knows what and then loses massive material in the midgame.  And still makes you go through the motions of mate.  Making the whole game one ridiculous excersize.  And in some positions, after a certian type of exchange/combat I honestly feel a resignation is called for.  imho, some games I'll fight until it is clear but I'd say I resign more then most.  

Ahh, but how can one compete against... the superknight!  Your rook, queen, and bishop are no match for their lone knight... at least in their own head lol! 

I beg to differ about a trillion times here: http://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/your-opponent-wont-resign-be-creative 

I played this creatively but was it really necessary?

Some times the positiong  can define the fate of the game, but there is always some way to temporarely evade the attack, if winning is the goal then don't let evasion give up pieces, checking the opponent so they have to reposition themself can give you a chance to arrange a few pieces to your advantage.

How does honor have anything to do with making life easier for an opponent in a competitive game?

Now, I could understand honor having something to do with making real life easier for someone...

If it means anything i mean no disrespect to my opponent.  I am not an expert in chess so for me at my level I view chess as more a form of combat.  As I have said I will leave the "field" of battle, ie resign more then I probably should.  In fact I have a game I am currently playing where I considered resigning for 3 straight moves, it was hopeless and basically over had he/she made any number of checking moves.  However just the last move he/she ever so carelessly placed his King on the same file as his Queen allowing me to capture the lady.  So I have some things to learn about the fine art of chess.  Was it skill on my part manuevering the way I did to force a percieved threat? or was it simply their blunder.  Personally I consider it a game I played poorly and had lost, yet it will score as a win.  Whenever someone tells me they got mate in like 7 I say thats not skill on your part but simply a mistake on the theirs.