excatly, but do you think is ungentleman thing to do this ?
Why?
Sort:
Personally, no, though allowing the checkmate after a nice combination is a courteous thing to do.
May 21, 2010
0
#64
But is doesn't happen in the WCC games though. To Elubas on this subject think still ok to do it in CC (resigning just before 1or 2 move checkmate)?
Yeah. A win's a win.
May 21, 2010
0
#66
true, but then why peoples complain about it ? couple of years ago here is was getting late need to go to bed, my computer keep getting disconnection didn't see that he gonna mate me in the next move but I logged off so the next day he say " way to go dude pretty cool of me doing that" sound like he was really pissed off.
I can't imagine a GM caring at all that he wouldn't be permitted to deliver mate.
For my part, after a few decades of serious chess, I certainly don't care at all as well, except in the case of some guy I might have a grudge against. Then I'd see delivering mate as a kind of punishment/shame for him and a crowning glory for me.
Personal feelings can change how even GMs conclude their games. Korchnoi and Karpov played out to a stalemate in a WC game--" Korchnoi said that it gave him pleasure to stalemate Karpov and that it was slightly humiliating" (wikipedia).
Apart from "feelings" I think you can depend on GMs to end their games in the interest of efficiency. Maybe not 100% but 99%+.
May 21, 2010
0
#68
Wow, goldendog! You don't play chess here? Or am I confused about something, after looking at your profile?
I'm not very good, only like 1500 rating, but if a GM lost a queen to me with no compensation for it on the third move, I think I would win the game. I've tried that against chessmaster 10th edition and I managed to beat it with a queen headstart. Now imagine if I was a GM just like them. They wouldn't stand a chance...
trysts wrote:
Wow, goldendog! You don't play chess here? Or am I confused about something, after looking at your profile?
What's the confusion?
May 21, 2010
0
#71
goldendog wrote:
trysts wrote:
Wow, goldendog! You don't play chess here? Or am I confused about something, after looking at your profile?
What's the confusion?
Just wondered. I was only suprised you don't play here.
trysts wrote:
goldendog wrote:
trysts wrote:
Wow, goldendog! You don't play chess here? Or am I confused about something, after looking at your profile?
What's the confusion?
Just wondered. I was only suprised you don't play here.
Re Online/CC chess, it's a lack of interest. I just don't enjoy such chess (so far).
Re live, It's a combination of low interest and laziness. If I really wanted to play some blitz (not my favorite form but I like it ok) I'd go elsewhere where they have timestamp. For longer games (what I really prefer) I'd go elsewhere and hope that I didn't run into an engine user population. Maybe a forlorn hope.
What I do here is post in the forums, and I find the forums here to be easily the best I've seen. I like chess history, culture, and current events. Though I'm lazy I can manage to contribute here without so much effort and I enjoy seeing the feedback. Just reading what the cream of the usual suspects posts here is fun for me.
Being able to make a joke of something ranks pretty high too and there's a good crowd here to receive it.
So in summary, I'm here to make fun of rich and people who think not resigning means that they're warriors.
May 21, 2010
0
#73
goldendog wrote:
trysts wrote:
goldendog wrote:
trysts wrote:
Wow, goldendog! You don't play chess here? Or am I confused about something, after looking at your profile?
What's the confusion?
Just wondered. I was only suprised you don't play here.
Re Online/CC chess, it's a lack of interest. I just don't enjoy such chess (so far).
Re live, It's a combination of low interest and laziness. If I really wanted to play some blitz (not my favorite form but I like it ok) I'd go elsewhere where they have timestamp. For longer games (what I really prefer) I'd go elsewhere and hope that I didn't run into an engine user population. Maybe a forlorn hope.
What I do here is post in the forums, and I find the forums here to be easily the best I've seen. I like chess history, culture, and current events. Though I'm lazy I can manage to contribute here without so much effort and I enjoy seeing the feedback. Just reading what the cream of the usual suspects posts here is fun for me.
Being able to make a joke of something ranks pretty high too and there's a good crowd here to receive it.
So in summary, I'm here to make fun of rich and people who think not resigning means that they're warriors.
Hilarious
I agree, it's a fun forum to write stuff in.
’And lastly, we learn by chess the habit of not being discouraged by present bad appearances in the state of our affairs; the habit of hoping for a favorable chance, and that of preserving in the search of resources.’ -Benjamin Franklin, ‘The Morals of Chess’
I don't think Benjamin Franklin meant about losing a queen though...
FlowerFlowers wrote:
you never know what is going to happen. you may find a weakness or think up something that will turn the tide. that is the cool thing, the way things go will can make you see a way to come out ahead. try. if it doesn't work, you still play well. put up a good fight. If you're going to sit down to play a game of chess play the game and suck it up if you lose. If you would rather resign than let the other player make the last three moves you see ahead that going to lead to a checkmate boo hoo. I'd like to see what moves are used to checkmate, that is part of the fun as painful as it is to lose.
It is true that you never know what is going to happen:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vKoAlpWD_Lg
FlowerFlowers wrote:
’And lastly, we learn by chess the habit of not being discouraged by present bad appearances in the state of our affairs; the habit of hoping for a favorable chance, and that of preserving in the search of resources.’ -Benjamin Franklin, ‘The Morals of Chess’
In the same essay:
"Snatch not eagerly at every advantage offered by his unskillfulness or inattention, but point out to him kindly that by such a move he places or leaves a Piece en prise unsupported, that by another he will put his King into a dangerous situation, etc."
Sounds like Ben suggests you not let your opppnent blunder away the Queen,
This post started out with the simple question of why do people resign at an early stage in a game when dropping a queen. It was answered with some interesting comments from all. Then a hyperthetical question was thrown in by my myself regarding, if in a world championship a player dropped their queen very early in the game (like three or four moves) would they resign to loose the championship and walk away not knowing if they could have thought back and won. I guess it all boils down to difference oppinions regarding the contentious issue of resigning. In my case, even though I am not the worlds greatest chess player. If I drop my queen early in the game I would give it a go and try make a fit of it to a point if I think I couldn't win then I would resign and give the op all the glory. Well this post was interesting with peoples thoughts on the issue.
This is not a post about proving a point, it's a post to say how you can still win a game if you drop your queen early and if you choose to fight on. A game between thespoon and CaleMoody007 where thespoon dropped his queen in move 9 and managed to fight back and obtain a check mate in move 30.
Because they want them to know they saw the mate coming and also don't want to give their opponent the satisfaction of checkmating the king.