What do you feel about players that do perpetual checks when they are losing?

Sort:
SocialPanda

WalhallaRoad, I guess that you also don´t like stalemates, right?

Ziggy_Zugzwang
Senator-Blutarsky
WalhallaRoad wrote:

Say you think you're beating someone and think you aren't that far away from a mate.  Say he somehow breaks through your defense with a queen and begins checking you all over the board.  What do you feel about this?  I thought i was winning a game pretty handily and my opponent sacrificed a pawn in order to give his queen open space to check me.  It was in a position in the board where I didn't have a shield for my king and so he could have checked me as many times as he wanted.  I think it's pretty cheap. 

Some editing done for you.

Yes, it is cheap. It's a saving grace bestowed on any player whose opponent suffers from myopia.

clarkvan33

Clearly many people here think you weren't actually winning. please provide a diagram for evidence. Otherwise, those arguments are perfectly relevant. Also, I'm interested to see this position.

MaryandJuana
vanman11 wrote:

Did your opponent win the game? I'm confused because of lack of commas.

I actually made a one big mistake that allowed him to do it so I guess I can take it.  I shouldn't have allowed it to happen.

SocialPanda

It´s white´s turn. I think that it´s a very good tactic for white. It´s a good draw for him.

clarkvan33

"I actually made a one big mistake that allowed him to do it so I guess I can take it.  I shouldn't have allowed it to happen."

So the game was a draw? I'm still unclear.

MaryandJuana
Senator-Blutarsky wrote:
WalhallaRoad wrote:

Say you think you're beating someone and think you aren't that far away from a mate.  Say he somehow breaks through your defense with a queen and begins checking you all over the board.  What do you feel about this?  I thought i was winning a game pretty handily and my opponent sacrificed a pawn in order to give his queen open space to check me.  It was in a position in the board where I didn't have a shield for my king and so he could have checked me as many times as he wanted.  I think it's pretty cheap. 

Some editing done for you.

Yes, it is cheap. It's a saving grace bestowed on any player whose opponent suffers from myopia.

The editing does not reflect what happened during the game. 

MaryandJuana
Cogwheel wrote:

Another lack of sport on your part:

http://www.chess.com/livechess/game?id=780450167

You abandoned this game because you were losing. Classy! 

 

 

 ok mr psychic.  I abandoned because I lost connection.

Senator-Blutarsky

Lets see the game.

Zigwurst

How would the "superior" side stop the onslaught? What kind of rules can be made? They aren't going to change chess to prevent draws, that would be idiotic.

MaryandJuana

This is the game.  I should have just taken his pawn with my pawn instead of letting it advance to 7th rank.  He wouldn't have been able to take it with his queen because I would have checkmated him.  I was not into just running around the entire board getting checked so I basically just walked into the loss plus I was down on time by one minute and if he just kept checking me I would have eventually lost on time.

 

http://www.chess.com/livechess/game?id=780432007

clarkvan33
[COMMENT DELETED]
clarkvan33

You may have been ahead in material, but you still lost, so I don't think that's cheap at all, even if it is annoying. Well played by your opponent to pull out the win.

MaryandJuana

only way that win was pulled out was because of that move.  I take the pawn and he has no perpetual check with his rook. 

clarkvan33
WalhallaRoad wrote:

only way that win was pulled out was because of that move.  I take the pawn and he has no perpetual check with his rook. 

That's on you then. Don't blame your opponent for your game-losing blunder.

SocialPanda

Ok, now you already have told us that you also have Time Management issues. That´s another thing for you to work in.

MaryandJuana

so many things I could and should have done differently.  For example.  I could have just let that bishop move back and there would have been an exchange of queens.  He has no chance in that position and his rook would have been gone also because I would have moved the bishop to the white square.

clarkvan33
WalhallaRoad wrote:

so many things I could and should have done differently.  For example.  I could have just let that bishop move back and there would have been an exchange of queens.  He has no chance in that position and his rook would have been gone also because I would have moved the bishop to the white square.

Coulda Shoulda Woulda, the classic excuses. Bottom line, you lost the game becuase you didn't defend against the perpetual checkwell enough.

LokiMundane

You walked yourself into mate.