General chess.com talk

[WhiteEagle22]

I'm playing for England v Canada!

I hope Canada wins this round! Can you handle two games at once?

I've secured 1st place in this tournament (just found it randomly while searching for open tournaments a couple months back). Some of my games were a bit sloppy, mostly my last one against Jambeat. I played rather inaccurately to the point where I lost my edge & the computer judged the position as fully equal but my opponent was scared by my seemingly strong attack & tried to create a counterattack & I busted him with a basic tactic... whoever makes the last blunder so they say .

I've also noticed you've secured first place in Round 1's Group A of my tourney. Congrats! I think you'll have to face queen_roro, colinf, and Col in the final 4. (Unless I suddently play a whole lot better when I get back!)

 

[col]

Beware queen-roro played very well against me - I thought I may well lose at one point.

 

[Panzar75]

Panzar is two boards higher for Sweden than I am for the USA - Northeast in our world league match so we just missed playing each other.

Damn this sudden unexpected rating burst. Seriously, my guy has 5/5 games on chess.com so far. Not only could I not study his games but also I fear he is much stronger than his rating suggest. I am going to play those games slowly and really do my best.

 

[WhiteEagle22]

Damn this sudden unexpected rating burst. Seriously, my guy has 5/5 games on chess.com so far. Not only could I not study his games but also I fear he is much stronger than his rating suggest. I am going to play those games slowly and really do my best.

Good luck to you both in the World League!

 

[DaveShack]

I'm playing for USA Southwest in the world league, after returning from vacation.

I doubt I can beat both Col and queen_roro in the JP tournament to get the upset and advance, but we'll see.

 

[peter grimes]

So Col just resigned a game, and I'm thinking of doing the same - after stupidly bungling a forced mate. But what's the accepted practice?
Is it considered bad sportsmanship to resign because you're disgusted with your own error?

 

[JonathanStrange]

In the OTB tournaments I've played in it was generally not considered bad sportsmanship at all to resign over the quality of your play; assuming you did so in a civil manner.

Flipping the board over or standing on the table shouting "How can I lose to this idiot!" was frowned on.

 

[col]

As ever it depends on the standard of the game. At what point is your position hopeless? My oppo was a 2000 player and I'd just blundered my queen for nothing . (It happens to us all )

 

[JonathanStrange]

I don't know about online games, in games I played in person at tournaments, people were probably happy their opponent resigned: they got the rating points and a better chance at some prize money.

 

[Sashie VII]

My oppo was a 2000 player and I'd just blundered my queen for nothing . (It happens to us all )

I once had 2 minor pieces and 3 pawns against a king with a lone pawn, and lost that game because I moved instantly (allowing him to queen his pawn 2 moves first (going past my pawn pair!)). The humiliation (People were watching my games) Did I mention my opponent was almost a beginner?

But resigning in a perfectly good position because you missed an earth-shattering move would be frowned on.

 

[WhiteEagle22]

I will only resign a game if I can't see a win or trying for a draw. But resigning after one bad move? Not likely!

 

[JonathanStrange]

One author or chessplayer wrote something to the effect that he recommended resigning "only if Bobby Fischer himself, were he to take your position, couldn't win it".

Refusing to resign a hopeless position sometimes suggests that the player is so weak he doesn't realize that he's no realistic chance (perhaps because against weaker opponents games do go back and forth dramatically) or that the (losing) player has so little respect for his opponent that he thinks the other guy needs better than a rook or queen advantage or the player's delusional.

I've played all three - hell, I've probably been all three too: (Inexperience) in a Las Vegas Unrated section, my first tournament, I was was two pawns ahead in a pawn endgame where my opponent's remaining pawns were doubled and isolated. He kept playing because, as he told me afterwards, five pawns vs three was too slight an edge at our level - even though it was a simple unopposed march to the eighth rank his king was too far away. (Delusional) In another tournament in Phoenix, when I'd become a 1800+ USCF player, I was playing a 1600+ player who really believed that his trading his bishop for my knight, doubling my pawns and opening my King's position was an advantage; even though I easily moved my rook to the open file and started a K-side attack that played itself. I'd say those are inexperienced or delusional players - although if they'd said "I wanted to make you prove the win" or "It was a mistake, but after I played it, I felt I might as well see what defense I could make" - 'cause I'll do the same thing myself at times.

And one time an 1800+ player, someone as strong as I was then, hung a piece early on, kept playing but was clearly rattled, dropped a pawn, and another but continued 5 minute "thinks" as if to bore me, and took an hour for his next five moves. Later he told me, that having usually beaten me before, he figured I needed more than a knight and two pawns to win. Obviously if you've a strong mating attack, material is irrelevant but he had no attack. He just was used to being the winner in our games.

I've probably have been and will be again, all of these players. I've been matched against players who I've had to mentally sweat to play while they seemed to be hardly paying attention. Against them I'm inexperienced, delusional and lacking in respect - but then, I, too wanted them to prove it. However, if I'd lost a piece or several pawns or were heading into mate, I'd hope I'd know the difference between believing I had a reasonable chance and expecting a miracle. If I played on, it would just be to experience how a better player wins a won game efficiently.

 

[civiijkw]

As an expert I played on in a lost position in the US Open against IM Donaldson, having mis-analysed it and thinking it was drawn. When he blew a tempo it ended up a draw.

In a later US Open I had dropped a couple of pawns against a C-player. I was offered a draw in the ending (minor pieces and still two pawns behind) but opted to play on, figuring he hadn't yet shown WHY he was only a C-player. He mis-played the ending and I won.

It's obviously much easier to remember the times playing on worked out. I've lost a number of games playing on in lost positions, but I've pulled out enough wins and draws that I don't resign while I still have chances.

 

[Narz]

civiijkw, you gotta jump in & join our vote chess masters tourney!

 

[peter grimes]

This has been fascinating reading - when I first mentioned Resignation Etiquette, I had no idea there would be so much response.

As far as my own situation goes, I haven't resigned [yet]. I don't think my position is winnable without a severe error on my opponent's part - which is not out of the question, at all. But this is one of those games that I looked forward to seeing that he had moved -- because I was anxious to press my attack; now the game is all but lost. What fun would the game be, and how far could one learn, if every game resulted in a smack-down of a win, right?

 

[WhiteEagle22]

Anyone have some good free sites (besides Chess.com) where I can study? I want to study all that I can.

I think I may use a chessboard from now on to help me get a good perspective of each game that I play online. I'm looking forward to winning again. I've set up a goal of regaining 1200+ ranking by the end of the year.

 

[Xyan]

The Annual CFC Tournament, and Narz's People, introduced me to www.chess.com. And this group, coming from the CFC forum, is one that is very interactive and there's a lot of communication amongst members. Be it vote chess or team matches, there's discussion. Members talk to each other. In the true sense of the word, it's a group. It's been a great pleasure to be part of this wonderful group of people, and to be honest, other groups I've joined has been a disappointment to me as I kept noticing the things they lack that we have. And to date I've left two groups that I've joined.

I only have one other group at the moment, which is my national team, and so far things look promising. Hopefully I won't have to leave that team too. But anyway, hats off to a great group.

I don't post much but yes, this is a wonderful chess group and I'm glad I'm in it.

 

[JonathanStrange]

I suppose I'd kick myself later if I were to see I'd resigned in an even or winning position. Although it could be a useful metaphor...

 

[Sashie VII]

I suppose I'd kick myself later if I were to see I'd resigned in an even or winning position. Although it could be a useful metaphor...

I personally hate resigning, and even more when I realize I have to.

 

[col]

This has been fascinating reading - when I first mentioned Resignation Etiquette, I had no idea there would be so much response.

As far as my own situation goes, I haven't resigned [yet]. I don't think my position is winnable without a severe error on my opponent's part - which is not out of the question, at all. But this is one of those games that I looked forward to seeing that he had moved -- because I was anxious to press my attack; now the game is all but lost. What fun would the game be, and how far could one learn, if every game resulted in a smack-down of a win, right?

It may not be winnable but a draw is certainly not out of question. If you cant win, the next objective is to not lose.