Good question.
IF I'm playing against someone that's far better than I am, I'd rather lose a good game. And sometimes against anyone ratings-wise, some games lead to interesting enough positions that winning or losing becomes secondary.
That said, if I win a bad game due to a clever exploitation of a blunder, that can make up for the lack of overall quality of the game.
I'd much rather lose a good one. Since I'm not playing for any significant stakes all that really matters is the quality of the game. All winning a bad game means is: "hey look -- my stupid defeated your stupider" -- no joy there... but that said, losing a bad game is worst of all. Or, I should say, turning what was going to be a good won game into a bad lost game... those are the ones that make you consider Bridge, Checkers, CounterStrike, etc.
Just win, baby.
u always look forward playing a good one. thats human nature.
but, at times the surprise definitely makes you happy.
eg- in this game i was an exchange down and the position was dead lost positionaly, but there were pieces on the board. and a slight oversight by my opponent allowed me to sac my queen and mate him with rook and bishop. #
another time i mated with only one knight after sacking the queen(the opponent could have taken the Knight and i would have resigned the moment he did that but he went for the bigger prize). Cant say it didnt put a smile on my face.
i played against a junior player about 2 years younger than me (he is 11)
time control 10+10
i played one of my worse game and ended up down a pawn in a simple pos, that even a 1200 like him can win. Having about 10 sec put my queen en prise, not realising that taking the queen leads to a mate in one(kind of backrank but with g2 guarded by knight f4. he takes the queen. i dont realise it is my turn. i realised it and with 3 sec i made the only sane check possible;mate.
i played against a junior player about 2 years younger than me (he is 11)
time control 10+10
i played one of my worse game and ended up down a pawn in a simple pos, that even a 1200 like him can win. Having about 10 sec put my queen en prise, not realising that taking the queen leads to a mate in one(kind of backrank but with g2 guarded by knight f4. he takes the queen. i dont realise it is my turn. i realised it and with 3 sec i made the only sane check possible;mate.
Ouch! I bet he will never forget your name.
Lose a good game, yes I like to win (who doesn't?) but I want to leave that board with self satifaction for playing a good game even though I losed. However if I win a bad game, all I will keep thinking is- well that was a waste of time!
A game of chess should result in a draw if both parties are indeed aiming for perfection.
A win in master level chess is like a dance where one skilled dancer might misses a step, often imperceptible to spectators. The vast majority of chess play better resembles two drunkards aimlessly stumbling across the dance floor.
Ok. Can we get a photo of you stumbling across the dance floor. You said it not me.
With or without the lamp shade?
Since this thread has received new life -
I much prefer to lose a well played game.
I don't mind winning a poorly played game. If I won, then at least I understood how to finally capitalize on my opponents blunders. Unless of course I look at the game and have no clue how I won.
But a well played loss at least gives me the satisfaction of knwowing that I am learning. I used to not be able to last more than 20 moves unless playing a pure patzer. Now I can at least bring it to the late middlegame - endgame stage most of the time.
I remember my losses more than I do my victories. A bad win is still a win, while a loss, regardless of how well I played, is still painful. I've had some good losses published (in Chess Life and other print publications), which is bittersweet. But I still prefer to win.
A game of chess should result in a draw if both parties are indeed aiming for perfection.
A win in master level chess is like a dance where one skilled dancer might misses a step, often imperceptible to spectators. The vast majority of chess play better resembles two drunkards aimlessly stumbling across the dance floor.
how can you compare something as chess to something you can even teach an animal to do.
Absolutely! I simply adored the Baltimore Zoos rendition of the Nutcracker...
how can you compare something as chess to something you can even teach an animal to do.
Humans are animals. Nothing more, nothing less.
how can you compare something as chess to something you can even teach an animal to do.
Humans are animals. Nothing more, nothing less.
I consider myself much more than a mere animal. To each his own I guess.
I have never won a "bad game" in my life.
First i have to say we are playing at chess.com. Then add that some of the players here are brutal. They rather beat you in game lying on their death bed than spend their remain moments with family and friends.
how can you compare something as chess to something you can even teach an animal to do.
Humans are animals. Nothing more, nothing less.
I consider myself much more than a mere animal. To each his own I guess.
Then you're a philosophical animal :) But Homo sapiens is still part of the Kingdom "Animalia".
Humans are more than animals, we created the word animal!
And?
Premise: Humans created a word
Conclusion: Therefore, humans cannot be described by it
Am I understanding your reasoning correctly?
Sure, a human can be called an animal. But being an animal doesn't imply incompetence, especially if you happen to be an animal that is a human :)
All depends on how you want to define things. If one wanted to alter the definition of stupid to refer to "the quality obtained by being a chess player," then ok, by that definition I'm stupid, but now stupid isn't starting to sound like an insult anymore.
A game of chess should result in a draw if both parties are indeed aiming for perfection.
A win in master level chess is like a dance where one skilled dancer might misses a step, often imperceptible to spectators. The vast majority of chess play better resembles two drunkards aimlessly stumbling across the dance floor.
how can you compare something as chess to something you can even teach an animal to do.