Stupid draw (-1 points for me)

Your opponent wasn't cowardly. Perpetual check (three-position repetition) is part of chess. If you want to win, one of the things you must do is prevent the possibility of perpetual check. If you don't, you have only yourself to blame.
Ali, were you really scared of that passed pawn :P You could have traded the queens and the end-game was an easy win.

Someone started abusing me because I couldn't win and only draw through perpetual check. As I see it, half a point is better than nothing. Some people act like spoilt brats sometimes.
I wonder if it ever happened in real chess game at tournaments. I guess black would get slap in the face.
I wonder if it ever happened in real chess game at tournaments. I guess black would get slap in the face.
Ali, why did you not trade the queens? Were you scared of a pawn end-game?
So you all saying if i cant win i should do perpetual check and just draw every single game? Against Kasparov too?
So you all saying if i cant win i should do perpetual check and just draw every single game? Against Kasparov too?
If you can, sure. Kasparov, Carlsen whoever.
Ali_Makaveli: See this Karpov vs Kasparov game - Karpov was ahead. Kasparov sacrificed a bishop and a rook to create a perpetual check position:
Ali_Makaveli: Why would anyone resign in a situation where you are unable to force a win?
I wonder if it ever happened in real chess game at tournaments. I guess black would get slap in the face.
It happens all the time in tournaments. It's part of the game. You had an easy win and you blew it by not trading queens.

So you all saying if i cant win i should do perpetual check and just draw every single game? Against Kasparov too?
It won't happen anyway.
I wonder if it ever happened in real chess game at tournaments.
Yes, all the time. It's common knowledge this is a drawing resource, and experienced players both look for it and guard against it.

So you all saying if i cant win i should do perpetual check and just draw every single game? Against Kasparov too?
It won't happen anyway.
But it can end with perpetual mate- no?
There are big chances indeed!

I think that was great play by black. It is exactly what I would have played for in that position. I am completely at a loss to explain why players - albeit normally quite weak players - think that this is some sort of problem. It is as if they think the opponent should let them win!!!
When I am losing a game I fight tooth and nail to try to make it hard for the opponent. They may slip up under the pressure even though they have a technically 'won' position. I try to activate any pawns I have to try to see if I can push one all the way. Or look for stalemate positions or perpetual check positions as shown in this great example.