There is a proof why it is a good idea to play lost positions on. :)
http://www.chess.com/echess/game?id=90719824
Is It Insulting to Play for a Stalemate, Time Win, or Draw?
Sort:
May 29, 2014
0
#23
It depends on the situation. Only an utter moron wouldn't be able to win King and Queen versus Lone King. You have King and Queen and I have nothing, I resign. However, that doesn't mean you just resign all lost positions. Same color Bishop ending, I'm down a pawn. You better prove it to me you can win. Bishop and Knight versus Lone King. Again, you better prove it! Two Rooks versus Rook and a Minor Piece with equal pawns? Again, you better prove it!
The rules state that you can play anything out to mate. I will say this though. Many players here lack class. If you have 14 seconds, and your opponent has 12 seconds, and you have King and Rook, and he has King and Rook, and you reject draw offers trying to blitz him out, you're an a$$, and players like this are all the more proof that Internet Blitz ratings are bullsh*t, only Standard, Over the Board ratings, mean anything. All other ratings are garbage! You have a 2100 blitz rating here? Congrats. Proves nothing. At the same time you have a 1200 rating over the board? You suck!
Not at all. If you ever watch Jerry from the Chessnetwork play a tournament (he streams a bunch) he uses the term "time burners" quite frequently. The clock is an important part of the game and any way to achieve a win is legit.
May 29, 2014
0
#25
over the board i bundered my queen with my oppoment had 6 seconds left i played on and won
Re ThrillerFan, I think in a long games, if you down hopelessly (like K+Q vs K) and your opponent has plenty of time, it is pointless to play on. However in blitz, or more so in bullet, it is a legit strategy to outplay your opponent on time. I agree, it sucks to lose on time with the next move checkmate (happened to me many times), but I just say this: do not play fast time control games if it bothers you so much. I personally do not consider bullet as a real chess game, it is only good for your opening portfolio practice. If you win - good, if you lose on time - does not matter much. For this reason bullet ratings dont tell much about quality of your game: some old folks with say 2000+ standard ratings, may be too slow with the mouse or tap, and have horrible bullet ratings; on the other hand, some young beginners with 1200 standard rating may be quicker with pointing devices to outtime these old experts
May 30, 2014
0
#27
JGambit wrote:
Players that get angry at the way others play (clock is part of the game) are rude.
I personally only resign when the position is to painfull to play. If it is a move or two to mate I often let it play out because I would like to see it as it helps my my pattern reconition for the future.
good plan JGambit like it that probably why watched my viking play all season seeing the losing ;pattern!!!
I once played a game where I had a lone king versus king and rook. It was soon obvious my opponent didn't know the technique for forcing checkmate so I played on, just dodging his pointless checks. He had me beat but didn't know how to finish. At my level, why not make your opponent prove the win?
I'm never offended when an opponent doesn't resign in a technically lost position. My rating is low, so why shouldn't he give me a chance to blunder away the win?
A really good example is a lone king against king, bishop and knight. Even better players can struggle with that one, so make 'em prove it!
Just promote a bunch of queens with premoves and make them resign.