Originally posted by Paul DiracI do that. Sometimes it takes that long before I'm certain I'll lose (generally because of some attacking option I missed). I'm sure there are players that would rather have their opponent resign than force the extra move from them.
Side comment: I know it is rare for grandmaster games to go all the way to checkmate, but I have seen a few games where that did happen. Probably a matter of time pressure.
- Mike
I generally resign when I can see no hope of escaping mate and there is no point in continuing - this is quite often just one or two moves from mate.
I used to get fed up when people did this to me but now I realise that it is just as good as mate (better sometimes because it shows that your opponent realises your plan and respects it) and also enables you to start new games more quickly.
Players with a higher skill level (not me I hasten to add!) may resign a lot sooner as they can see the disadvantages in their position more easily (especially if they are playing people of similarly high skill level.
There is also the "resignation in anger" when your opponent loses their Queen or rook through a blunder and is so upset they kick the board across the room in a virtual way...........
Originally posted by lauseyIn general, I would agree.
Yes, the way I see it is when there is one move from mate, then the next move is obviously a completely pointless one. Hence why bother playing it? Just resign. 🙂
However, sometimes your opponent constructs a mate so beautiful (especially if it involves a sac) that it is worth it to play the mate out.
For relatively simple mates (back rank mates, Queen mates etc.) it's probably better to resign.
Originally posted by lucifershammer
In general, I would agree.
However, sometimes your opponent constructs a mate so beautiful (especially if it involves a sac) that it is worth it to play the mate out.
For relatively simple mates (back rank mates, Queen mates etc.) it's probably better to resign.
Oh yes, good point. A Queen sac especially. 🙂
Anyone here manage a Queen sac that was at least 3 moves before the mate (where the sac actually lead to the mate, not a blunder by the opponent that allowed a mate anyway)?
PS. Maybe a new thread is in order for this one.
Originally posted by lauseyNot a queen sac - but a beautiful mate nevertheless Game 710735. I realised just after I resigned that I should probably have let the mate go through. (Shaul - sorry!)
Oh yes, good point. A Queen sac especially. 🙂
Anyone here manage a Queen sac that was at least 3 moves before the mate (where the sac actually lead to the mate, not a blunder by the opponent that allowed a mate anyway)?
PS. Maybe a new thread is in order for this one.
Originally posted by lucifershammerI can't see the mate, can you show me? 🙂
Not a queen sac - but a beautiful mate nevertheless Game 710735. I realised just after I resigned that I should probably have let the mate go through. (Shaul - sorry!)
O.