Why you shouldn't always resign after blundering a queen. - Chess Forums - Page 2

Still_donirtha

Jan 18, 2019

0

#21

Debistro wrote:

With bullet chess, it's standard practice not to resign and trying to flag the opponent. Especially the fast bullet like 1 min with no increment....

Well, it is bullet, a mode where making a mistake is pretty common among all players due to the short time, so it makes sense to not resign in low time controls.

However, in longer games...

TheCalculatorKid

Jan 19, 2019

0

#22

Donirtha wrote:

TheCalculatorKid wrote:

Donirtha wrote:

HiThereImNewToo wrote:

TheCalculatorKid wrote:

Don't get me wrong, I have resigned in the past when I got frustrated at myself. But my new years chess resolution is to resign less, after all I learn nothing from resigning but if I play to the end I have an opportunity to capitalise on any blunders by my opponent and also the opportunity to learn how to close a game down if they don't blunder. Plus I can analyse my game afterwards to see what went wrong and why.

This game is an example of where I blundered my queen, but came back to win the game. Usually I would have resigned after this blunder, but new year new me and all that lot.

I mean at your level blundering a queen for no compensation doesn't mean it's not still anyone's game.

It's called "I disrespect my opponent because I believe he's stupid".

how did I disrespect my opponent?

By not resigning, you show that you think he's going to screw up, which translates to "you are stupid and I'm going to let you suffer 'till your idiocy f**ks you over".

by playing a game of chess against someone you are hoping they will screw up at some point so should we never play chess?

TheCalculatorKid

Jan 19, 2019

0

#23

Debistro wrote:

With bullet chess, it's standard practice not to resign and trying to flag the opponent. Especially the fast bullet like 1 min with no increment....

I reckon I've half of my bullet wins were on time

Still_donirtha

Jan 19, 2019

0

#24

TheCalculatorKid wrote:

Donirtha wrote:

TheCalculatorKid wrote:

Donirtha wrote:

HiThereImNewToo wrote:

TheCalculatorKid wrote:

Don't get me wrong, I have resigned in the past when I got frustrated at myself. But my new years chess resolution is to resign less, after all I learn nothing from resigning but if I play to the end I have an opportunity to capitalise on any blunders by my opponent and also the opportunity to learn how to close a game down if they don't blunder. Plus I can analyse my game afterwards to see what went wrong and why.

This game is an example of where I blundered my queen, but came back to win the game. Usually I would have resigned after this blunder, but new year new me and all that lot.

I mean at your level blundering a queen for no compensation doesn't mean it's not still anyone's game.

It's called "I disrespect my opponent because I believe he's stupid".

how did I disrespect my opponent?

By not resigning, you show that you think he's going to screw up, which translates to "you are stupid and I'm going to let you suffer 'till your idiocy f**ks you over".

by playing a game of chess against someone you are hoping they will screw up at some point so should we never play chess?

There's a fine line between good moral values and sadism. Understanding that you made a mistake that ruined your game and resigning to show that you respect your opponent's skill that won over you is one thing. Continuously torturing your opponent by not admitting you were not good enough is another thing.

TheCalculatorKid

Jan 20, 2019

0

#25

Donirtha wrote:

TheCalculatorKid wrote:

Donirtha wrote:

TheCalculatorKid wrote:

Donirtha wrote:

HiThereImNewToo wrote:

TheCalculatorKid wrote:

Don't get me wrong, I have resigned in the past when I got frustrated at myself. But my new years chess resolution is to resign less, after all I learn nothing from resigning but if I play to the end I have an opportunity to capitalise on any blunders by my opponent and also the opportunity to learn how to close a game down if they don't blunder. Plus I can analyse my game afterwards to see what went wrong and why.

This game is an example of where I blundered my queen, but came back to win the game. Usually I would have resigned after this blunder, but new year new me and all that lot.

I mean at your level blundering a queen for no compensation doesn't mean it's not still anyone's game.

It's called "I disrespect my opponent because I believe he's stupid".

how did I disrespect my opponent?

By not resigning, you show that you think he's going to screw up, which translates to "you are stupid and I'm going to let you suffer 'till your idiocy f**ks you over".

by playing a game of chess against someone you are hoping they will screw up at some point so should we never play chess?

There's a fine line between good moral values and sadism. Understanding that you made a mistake that ruined your game and resigning to show that you respect your opponent's skill that won over you is one thing. Continuously torturing your opponent by not admitting you were not good enough is another thing.

But clearly I was good enough otherwise I would not have won. Players at your level might not appreciate that a mistake does not always lead to defeat.

Still_donirtha

Feb 2, 2019

0

#26

TheCalculatorKid wrote:

Donirtha wrote:

TheCalculatorKid wrote:

Donirtha wrote:

TheCalculatorKid wrote:

Donirtha wrote:

HiThereImNewToo wrote:

TheCalculatorKid wrote:

Don't get me wrong, I have resigned in the past when I got frustrated at myself. But my new years chess resolution is to resign less, after all I learn nothing from resigning but if I play to the end I have an opportunity to capitalise on any blunders by my opponent and also the opportunity to learn how to close a game down if they don't blunder. Plus I can analyse my game afterwards to see what went wrong and why.

This game is an example of where I blundered my queen, but came back to win the game. Usually I would have resigned after this blunder, but new year new me and all that lot.

I mean at your level blundering a queen for no compensation doesn't mean it's not still anyone's game.

It's called "I disrespect my opponent because I believe he's stupid".

how did I disrespect my opponent?

By not resigning, you show that you think he's going to screw up, which translates to "you are stupid and I'm going to let you suffer 'till your idiocy f**ks you over".

by playing a game of chess against someone you are hoping they will screw up at some point so should we never play chess?

There's a fine line between good moral values and sadism. Understanding that you made a mistake that ruined your game and resigning to show that you respect your opponent's skill that won over you is one thing. Continuously torturing your opponent by not admitting you were not good enough is another thing.

But clearly I was good enough otherwise I would not have won. Players at your level might not appreciate that a mistake does not always lead to defeat.

Yes, but these are lower levels we're talking about here. When you get to the more serious levels (e.g. 1900+) mistakes tend to be less forgiving. You are lucky, yes, but mistakes like that show how weak you can be and prove that you have much to learn.

There's luck in chess, but great players don't rely on it.

Still_donirtha

Feb 2, 2019

0

#27

SpiderUnicorn wrote:

I can't believe a 1400+ player can concoct such garbage

Well, welcome to the USCF.

Still_donirtha

Feb 2, 2019

0

#28

SpiderUnicorn wrote:

The only time I lost when my opponent blundered a queen was when about I was 1200

You must've been sad.

TheCalculatorKid

Feb 2, 2019

0

#29

Donirtha wrote:

TheCalculatorKid wrote:

Donirtha wrote:

TheCalculatorKid wrote:

Donirtha wrote:

TheCalculatorKid wrote:

Donirtha wrote:

HiThereImNewToo wrote:

TheCalculatorKid wrote:

Don't get me wrong, I have resigned in the past when I got frustrated at myself. But my new years chess resolution is to resign less, after all I learn nothing from resigning but if I play to the end I have an opportunity to capitalise on any blunders by my opponent and also the opportunity to learn how to close a game down if they don't blunder. Plus I can analyse my game afterwards to see what went wrong and why.

This game is an example of where I blundered my queen, but came back to win the game. Usually I would have resigned after this blunder, but new year new me and all that lot.

I mean at your level blundering a queen for no compensation doesn't mean it's not still anyone's game.

It's called "I disrespect my opponent because I believe he's stupid".

how did I disrespect my opponent?

By not resigning, you show that you think he's going to screw up, which translates to "you are stupid and I'm going to let you suffer 'till your idiocy f**ks you over".

by playing a game of chess against someone you are hoping they will screw up at some point so should we never play chess?

There's a fine line between good moral values and sadism. Understanding that you made a mistake that ruined your game and resigning to show that you respect your opponent's skill that won over you is one thing. Continuously torturing your opponent by not admitting you were not good enough is another thing.

But clearly I was good enough otherwise I would not have won. Players at your level might not appreciate that a mistake does not always lead to defeat.

Yes, but these are lower levels we're talking about here. When you get to the more serious levels (e.g. 1900+) mistakes tend to be less forgiving. You are lucky, yes, but mistakes like that show how weak you can be and prove that you have much to learn.

There's luck in chess, but great players don't rely on it.

every player relies on luck. again if you never blunder you never lose.

TheCalculatorKid

Feb 2, 2019

0

#30

SpiderUnicorn wrote:

Oh come on

the defence by your opponent was pathetic

A decent player would've won without effort

it doesn't matter how pathetic the defence is. the point is that had I resigned I would have lost, but as it is I played on and won.

TheCalculatorKid

Feb 2, 2019

0

#31

SpiderUnicorn wrote:

PATHETIC

would you have resigned?

TheCalculatorKid

Feb 2, 2019

0

#32

SpiderUnicorn wrote:

I can't believe a 1400+ player can concoct such garbage

nothing was concocted, I just had a belief that since I blundered, my opponent might blunder also, and I was right

TheCalculatorKid

Feb 2, 2019

0

#33

SpiderUnicorn wrote:

The only time I lost when my opponent blundered a queen was when about I was 1200

then you don't play enough chess.

TheCalculatorKid

Feb 2, 2019

0

#34

Donirtha wrote:

SpiderUnicorn wrote:

I can't believe a 1400+ player can concoct such garbage

Well, welcome to the USCF.

what is the UCF

Still_donirtha

Feb 2, 2019

0

#35

TheCalculatorKid wrote:

SpiderUnicorn wrote:

I can't believe a 1400+ player can concoct such garbage

nothing was concocted, I just had a belief that since I blundered, my opponent might blunder also, and I was right

This is the problem that I’ve told you about. This belief is why you’re going to suffer in higher levels.

Destroyer942

Feb 3, 2019

0

#36

Donirtha wrote:

TheCalculatorKid wrote:

SpiderUnicorn wrote:

I can't believe a 1400+ player can concoct such garbage

nothing was concocted, I just had a belief that since I blundered, my opponent might blunder also, and I was right

This is the problem that I’ve told you about. This belief is why you’re going to suffer in higher levels.

Through suffering he shall gain strength. The fear, the anger, the hate, it will make him try harder, study longer, give him focus and endurance, make him stronger. Only if you suffer for hanging your pieces will you protect them in future games.

TheCalculatorKid

Feb 3, 2019

0

#37

Donirtha wrote:

TheCalculatorKid wrote:

SpiderUnicorn wrote:

I can't believe a 1400+ player can concoct such garbage

nothing was concocted, I just had a belief that since I blundered, my opponent might blunder also, and I was right

This is the problem that I’ve told you about. This belief is why you’re going to suffer in higher levels.

I will never suffer. there's plenty of times I blunder and still lose, but there's no reason to resign when I do so.

Pulpofeira

Feb 3, 2019

0

#38

I've said it before, I once saw an OTB 90+60 rated game between two +1600 FIDE. My teammate lost his queen to a bishop on a skewer; many moves later the opponent blundered and allowed a knight fork on his king and queen. So the former ended a piece up and eventually won the game.

Firethorn15

Feb 3, 2019

0

#39

Ignore Donirtha and SpiderUnicorn; they're clearly just trolling.

The USCF is the US Chess Federation. Considering this is a live chess.com game, and you're British, I don't see any relevance.

I wouldn't have resigned in live chess after blundering the queen in this position. You still have traces of a kingside attack and the position remains complicated; by move 23 you actually have pretty decent compensation. If the opponent had managed to simplify the position such that his King was safe and you had no counterplay, then I would consider resigning.

Just as a relevant story: there was a game in the British Championship playoffs in 2012, so between two GMs (Stephen Gordon and Gawain Jones), where one player (Gawain) blundered horribly in the first game under the pressure and dropped almost a whole queen. He went on to win the game, and then the second as well, and won the match and the title. It's not at all disrespectful to play on in complicated positions where you have blundered.

Firethorn15

Feb 3, 2019

0

#40

Here is the Gordon-Jones game referred to above, with annotations by SonofPearl.