Your opponent is not supposed to listen to advice during an ongoing game, so he should simply ignore your suggestion.
EDIT: Sorry I answered too fast, that is before looking at the comments earlier in the game and realizing it is a joke. Well, have fun
Lol, yes, 8minutes, it boggles the mind, right. I mean, its not like 2500 will overlook a mate in 1 or something...
It seems our friend here is joking but i can't really tell. I sincerely hope that noone is that stupid.
its 2. c4!! dxc4?!
Your opponent may attempt 7.Bxf7+ mate before he resigns. Or, he may wonder why you are so underrated.
hahah me:2851
ne5?? "my plan worked perfectly"
That's a nice trap, I'll have to remember it...
Thats a tactical oversight by your opponent. Majorly down in exchange and hence material.
I'd resign. But not without offering draw first, you have to be tricky.
Thats a tactical oversight by your opponent. Majorly down in exchange and hence material.
The thread is a joke. Taking the queen leads to a mate in 1.
Gambit after the x-men character.
lol.
My opponent should have resigned at least twice during this game. I am clearly far enough ahead in material to win. But he's dumb and won't resign, probably because he didn't even realize that losing his queen means that he will lose the game.
We're playing a postal correspondence game and he agreed to let me share the unfinished game. Isn't it obvious that my opponent should resign here? Isn't it good chess etiquette to resign when you're a full queen down?
I think that my opponent thinks that I will blunder or something, but he doesn't realize that I claim to have a rating of 2851.
So why don't people resign in clearly lost positions?
Dude! Are you nuts!? 2.c4 is not a mistake. Its called a gambit. The variation goes like this...
One more thing, you are 2851 and dont know what a GAMBIT is!!! and you say that your 'plan' worked perfectly!!!!!! How did you even end up with that rating!
Your opponent is not a GM so you dont need to bother...
My opponent should have resigned at least twice during this game. I am clearly far enough ahead in material to win. But he's dumb and won't resign, probably because he didn't even realize that losing his queen means that he will lose the game.
We're playing a postal correspondence game and he agreed to let me share the unfinished game. Isn't it obvious that my opponent should resign here? Isn't it good chess etiquette to resign when you're a full queen down?
I think that my opponent thinks that I will blunder or something, but he doesn't realize that I claim to have a rating of 2851.
So why don't people resign in clearly lost positions?
After taking his Queen, why doesn't white move his white Bishop to put your king in Checkmate?
Some serious sense of humour failure in two of the replies here.
Zeus, no need to dig up old threads, especially when you don't understand them.
That was nice.picking up old threads.black's game is over BXf7.mate .
Certainly the player has a genuine complaint.All junior level players think
winning the queen is the end of the game.Certainly the player he/she
is under rated considering she/he has come with such a genuine complaint and GM (Black in this game)should have considered this
request seriously and let her/him post it on a forum for discussions
My opponent should have resigned at least twice during this game. I am clearly far enough ahead in material to win. But he's dumb and won't resign, probably because he didn't even realize that losing his queen means that he will lose the game.
We're playing a postal correspondence game and he agreed to let me share the unfinished game. Isn't it obvious that my opponent should resign here? Isn't it good chess etiquette to resign when you're a full queen down?
I think that my opponent thinks that I will blunder or something, but he doesn't realize that I claim to have a rating of 2851.
So why don't people resign in clearly lost positions?