i may play for a bit to see if there was some tactic that i didn't see. but i think resignation is reasonable. be sure to tell your friend that you want them to play their best and not go easy on you.
similiarly, i once blundered against my dad and made a chat comment imediately with "oops" or something and he offered to play a few fake moves to achieve "Takeback". i told him to take her and lost in two moves. much more fun that way.
No. He probably figures you'll trip up again later. I'd accept the lifelife and soldier on.
I would like to resign as the real fun of the game lies in overcoming the obstacles,though it may lead to at times loosing of the game ! we always learn from such blunders & remember them in future,especially when we have paid a prize in terms of a heavy piece !
After some thought I resigned the game. No way to win. If by some n\miracle I did win I lost any way. He is a good guy and I rechallenged and he accepted. I think you should always give your best game. This will be a blundr I will always remember
After some thought I resigned the game. No way to win. If by some n\miracle I did win I lost any way. He is a good guy and I rechallenged and he accepted. I think you should always give your best game. This will be a blundr I will always remember
I agree. It may have been good intentions and all, but I don't know many people who would want anything less than the best from their opponent.
Of course, sometimes there is a reason not to take material that seems free -- but when it's a queen the reason will likely not be hard to figure out. (I declined a poison pawn once and my opponent commented after the game I'd gone easy on him, evidently he didn't realize it was poison :)
I consider your higher rated opponent's decision - NOT to take your blundered queen - a valid stroke for levelling-the-playing-field.
The whole world does not have to be handicaped. One great thing about Chess is always a level playing field
However, the question remains ... "If a friend and a much higher rated player and he is both. Did not take your Queen after a blunder in order to just keep game going would you resign? Yes it is a rated game."
which is more important: the playing experience (and acknowledging your's friend's chivalry in not striking a man when he is down), or the purity of the rating calculation?
For example, when I play friends that I am better than, I try to win just as hard as I always do. That way, they know they played great if they beat me. None of my friends ever ask me to take it easy on them and let them win. What's the point in that?
Why do we have leagues in every professional sport?
For example, when I play friends that I am better than, I try to win just as hard as I always do. That way, they know they played great if they beat me. None of my friends ever ask me to take it easy on them and let them win. What's the point in that?
I agree! No one is helped by letting them win. Teach them or give them advice, but don't let them win. As the man in the commercial says, "YOU PLAY TO WIN THE GAME!" When I play anyone with a higher rating than I have, I play to win, but if I learned he let me win that would be a disappointment.
For example, when I play friends that I am better than, I try to win just as hard as I always do. That way, they know they played great if they beat me. None of my friends ever ask me to take it easy on them and let them win. What's the point in that?
artfizz wrote: Why do we have leagues in every professional sport?
Karl_ wrote: Huh? Where does that relate here? Are you saying some pro leagues throw games?
The purpose of leagues is to make a game fairer by ensuring that people play against teams of similar ability.
Karl_ wrote: LOL, that's not why they have leagues! At least not for pro sport leagues in the States. If it was, you would see all the weaker teams in the same division. They do it by location mostly. Less travel time and time zone problems. Also for the purposes of traditional rivalries.
In that case, we organise things slightly differently here in the UK. We don't generally have multimillion pound football clubs playing pub teams - even if they happen to be conveniently colocated in the same town.
"The English football league system, also known as the football pyramid, is a series of interconnected leagues for club football in England (although for historical, economic and financial reasons six Welsh clubs also compete). The system has a hierarchical format with promotion and relegation between leagues at different levels, allowing even the smallest club the possibility of ultimately rising to the very top of the system. There are more than 140 leagues, containing more than 480 divisions.[1] The exact number of clubs varies from year to year as clubs join and leave leagues or fold altogether, but an estimated average of 15 clubs per division implies that more than 7,000 clubs are members of a league in the English football league system."
My point stands: virtually every activity is stratified by ability. It's not much fun for beginners to play experts - and even less fun for experts to play beginners - UNLESS the playing field has been levelled.
If I win, great...but if I lose...I don't want any charity. I don't like the handicap system in golf and wouldn't want a similar system in chess.
And for friendly games. Not much point in two friends playing if one is much stronger than the other and never loses, is there?
unless you just like playing with your friend.
yes. even if i went on to win id still feel dead inside.
good thing you're sacking pieces now and learning lessons instead of when your life actually depends on it
Was that more or less a generic moral?
Though you'd presumably feel even worse (perhaps dead inside and outside) if you went on to lose?
The playing field is never truly leveled since the best will always win. The key in any competion is to try your best and than learn from those who are better. Learn from mistakes and move foward. The idea that the field should be level in order for players to have "fun" is in the end just ridiculous. This always winds up softening people up. Being creamed by a stronger player is what makes a player stronger.
This idea in schools and junior league there should be no winner or looser is an example of just how dopey we have become. And how weak we will become.
If a friend and a much higher rated player and he is both. Did not take your Queen after a blunder in order to just keep game going would you resign? Yes it is a rated game.