strawberrygasoline wrote:
So if the ratings are so worthless, why do we have them?
Good question.
When is the right time to resign?
Sort:
Nov 3, 2023
0
#43
mpaetz wrote:
Trixdrr wrote:
Mpaetz mentioned that people often blunder in complicated positions even when they have the lead. I don't. I just get so extremely bored and unmotivated that I'd rather lose just to get it over with and start just making careless moves. It sucks the joy right out of the game.
If you never blunder how can you maintain such low ratings?
Oh, I do blunder. I meant to say that the complexity is not what causes my blunders. Complexity makes me feel engaged and interested. Playing longish games with no challenge makes me tired and bored, and that's when I start to blunder.
uXbsjdwnhsjsidj
Nov 3, 2023
0
#45
If it's bullet or blitz never resign as time management is far more important than the actual position or amount of pieces on the board. People blunder winning positions even at highest levels just because they are short on time. In losing position play passively, defensively, don't trade, avoid threats, your opponent will have to stop, think and that's how they'll lose. Thinking is not allowed here.
In rapid or daily being short on bishop or horse in an equal position is valid reason to resign.
Coaches usually teach their students not to resign and to play till checkmate. Indeed, I have played games in a losing position, but one of these things happen:
The opponent makes a mistake, allowing me to remove his/her winning advantage
The opponent runs out of time
The game ends in stalemate
I somehow find checkmate with little material
I am able to force a draw by repetition or 50 move rule
This may not necessarily make you win, but a draw is better than losing by resignation. I have also played games in a winning position, but my opponent never resigned. I sometimes mess up, allowing my opponent to remove my winning advantage.
I've often heard Magnus Carlsen describe how you should worry about your own play and have faith in that rather than relying on your opponent to make a mistake. Two wrongs doesn't make a right, so I consider it a hollow victory to continue after your mistakes and thus effectively ignoring that you indeed made one.
I believe that you are seriously misinterpreting what Magnus said. That sentence doesn't have the meaning that you think it has. He is talking against unsound tricks and "hope chess" and not against fighting in bad positions.
Everyone makes mistakes. The person who makes the second-to-last mistake wins.
I'm not quoting him. I am as you sort off put it interpreting him. Actually you claim that I am misinterpreting him. Which is not for you to say exactly since I'm not quoting him. You don't know what I'm referring to that he said.
And I only brought him up because you started mentioning GM's. What they do doesn't really have anything to do with how much the chess community resigns or not.
But if you insist on talking along that road then have you noticed how often skilled chess players generally resign compared to beginners?