Why do players go for 8 queens?
Sort:
Feb 3, 2018
0
#2
Sounds like we should play. I'm just as frustrated because I lose all the time!
Feb 3, 2018
0
#3
Sadly if you don't resign the other player can do whatever they want. At least they aren't promoting to 8 knights.
Strangemover wrote:
Sadly if you don't resign the other player can do whatever they want. At least they aren't promoting to 8 knights.
Just had a game where I took out half their army with just the king. Like bruh just pin me down with a few rooks or something. I'm TRYING to make it easy for you
Feb 3, 2018
0
#5
Depends on what we are playing. If it's bullet and I'm clearly winning then I will just for fun because my opponent doesn't resign. Makes for good pratice not stalemating your opponent. But in a long games I'll just end it quickly if it's at that point out of respect
ARealDumbChessplayer wrote:
I have a similar question about GMs, but kind of the opposite. Why do they resign so early? I would have fought on. I think some GMs are lazy because of this. They get money no matter what. They are rich snobs without a real job. So, they can draw games and resign. They still get millions and interviewed after the game.
Get paid to lose? Is it possible to learn this power?
In the sub 900 category, it is possible they don't know how to checkmate without 8 queens. I played a friend who had not learned checkmates. I gave him 2 rooks and told him to get me. He could not. I also gave him a queen, and carefully walked my king to a square he would likely stalemate me on. He did. And he is stronger than most non-serious players I know. When I was a kid, I did not know how to checkmate with a king and queen. I won by capturing my opponent's pieces and then promoting my pawns, and then carefully avoiding stalemate as I checked him around the board.
Chesserroo2 wrote:
In the sub 900 category, it is possible they don't know how to checkmate without 8 queens. I played a friend who had not learned checkmates. I gave him 2 rooks and told him to get me. He could not. I also gave him a queen, and carefully walked my king to a square he would likely stalemate me on. He did. And he is stronger than most non-serious players I know. When I was a kid, I did not know how to checkmate with a king and queen. I won by capturing my opponent's pieces and then promoting my pawns, and then carefully avoiding stalemate as I checked him around the board.
I guess. I mean I'm bad at chess (I have ADD, I don't have the patience or desire for patience needed to see complex strategies ahead of time, I'm a sledgehammer, not a scalpel), but some of these are providing inadvertent entertainment in that even someone like me who can only think 1 move ahead is able to see the sloppy mistakes that lead to a king wiping out 2 rooks, a bishop, a knight, half the pawns, and even a queen sometimes (singlehanedly, I throw away the other pieces). Life in the sub 600 I guess.
They just want to show off....torture you to death rather than suddenly killing you!
ARealDumbChessplayer wrote:
I have a similar question about GMs, but kind of the opposite. Why do they resign so early? I would have fought on. I think some GMs are lazy because of this. They get money no matter what. They are rich snobs without a real job. So, they can draw games and resign. They still get millions and interviewed after the game.
The only GM that earns even close to "millions" is Carlsen. I doubt most GM's get interviewed after most of the games they play. Chess masters usually earn money from teaching chess and writing books about chess. They don't resign because they're lazy it's because to them it's a clearly lost position even though you might not see it.
Feb 4, 2018
0
#11
Strangemover wrote:
Sadly if you don't resign the other player can do whatever they want. At least they aren't promoting to 8 knights.
Not quite 8 knights, but this guy wouldn't resign, so......
ARealDumbChessplayer wrote:
I have a similar question about GMs, but kind of the opposite. Why do they resign so early? I would have fought on. I think some GMs are lazy because of this. They get money no matter what. They are rich snobs without a real job. So, they can draw games and resign. They still get millions and interviewed after the game.
Username checks out.
Amazingly, despite trying to do my usual hand holding, I managed to win with a pawn and a king because he kept making moves that forced me to kill them to save my king (I try not to use the forfeit button, since that robs me of the purpose). He forfeited with at least 3-4 non-pawn pieces left. Stained my nearly flawless defeat recor 
Happened again. I was literally calling out how which spots would checkmate me with his queen, and trying to move my king obligingly, and got forced to kill a few pieces, and.. they forfeit.
Feb 4, 2018
0
#14
Sarnen01 wrote:
Yeah but at your current playing level that's to be expected. the lower you go the worse chess you play against. You could probably win a whole game without moving a pawn if your any good
Happened again. I was literally calling out how which spots would checkmate me with his queen, and trying to move my king obligingly, and got forced to kill a few pieces, and.. they forfeit.
SillyChessMoves wrote:
Sarnen01 wrote:
Happened again. I was literally calling out how which spots would checkmate me with his queen, and trying to move my king obligingly, and got forced to kill a few pieces, and.. they forfeit.
Yeah but at your current playing level that's to be expected. the lower you go the worse chess you play against. You could probably win a whole game without moving a pawn if your any good
Without pawn moves you wouldn't be able to move your bishops or rooks and your queen and king could move but only on c1/c8, e1/e8, d1/d8 or f1/f8 unless your oppont sacrifices one of their pieces for a pawn and even the most novice of players knows that a pawn is worth less than lets say a bishop
Feb 5, 2018
0
#16
DragonPhoenixSlayer wrote:
SillyChessMoves wrote:
Sarnen01 wrote:
Happened again. I was literally calling out how which spots would checkmate me with his queen, and trying to move my king obligingly, and got forced to kill a few pieces, and.. they forfeit.
Yeah but at your current playing level that's to be expected. the lower you go the worse chess you play against. You could probably win a whole game without moving a pawn if your any good
Without pawn moves you wouldn't be able to move your bishops or rooks and your queen and king could move but only on c1/c8, e1/e8, d1/d8 or f1/f8 unless your oppont sacrifices one of their pieces for a pawn and even the most novice of players knows that a pawn is worth less than lets say a bishop
Okay Mrs. Technical that wasn't the point.
I hate chess, and only play this to build up tolerance for frustration and failure, so I throw the games. What I don't get is why people drag it out when I'm attacking the center with a solo king. Why you gotta march pawns across the entire board to pin down one king that isn't fighting back very hard? Like are you grinding EXP? Rep for the Frostsaber mount reins? Just end it already. Is there some mechanic I don't get that gives you extra points or something for dragging it out and loading up the board and killing every piece?