We have seen a thread in which players posted their best sacrifices. Cool games, by the way guys. Now I'd like to see some games which end in an elegant checkmate. An Elegant checkmate is one in which the winner checkmates his/her opponent without having taken his/her Queen during the game. Resignations count if mate is imminent, but not if the opponent resigns because of loss of material.
For instance, I would have had an elegant mate here: Game 1012818 had my opponent not resigned.
The checkmate is 32. Kg2 Bh3+ 33. Kh1 (33. Kh2 Bf1# ) Bg4+ 34. Kg2 (34. Qh2 Bxf3+ 35. Kg1 Qe1# ) Qh3+ 35. Kf2 Qxf3+ 36. Ke1 Qe2#
Now I'm not too sure why an elegant mate is one which doesn't involve taking your opponents queen. So instead I give you underpromotion for mate.
Game 1086815
I spotted the mate on move 24.
EDIT: Smiley attack
Originally posted by johnbartHe only had one move, 24...KG2, 25 Bh3+, and he could only have returned to H2, I would then have moved my Bishop to F1, and it would have been an elegant mate.
Not to be a stickler but can you point out what your elegant mate "would" have been had your opponent not resigned?
Now I'm not too sure why an elegant mate is one which doesn't involve taking your opponents queen. So instead I give you underpromotion for mate.Elegant is elegant whether Q's are still on board or not. Gotta say I really like this underpromotion and for what it's worth here's a rec.
Game 1086815
I spotted the mate on move 24.
EDIT: Smiley attack[/b]
Originally posted by XanthosNZHa, that was beautiful, Xanthos, thanks for that one.
Now I'm not too sure why an elegant mate is one which doesn't involve taking your opponents queen. So instead I give you underpromotion for mate.
Game 1086815
I spotted the mate on move 24.
EDIT: Smiley attack
Originally posted by TRAINS44Oh come on, not all checkmates are elegant. When you have two rooks, and your opponent just has a King, it's not elegant. I'll concede that Xanthos game had a really slick checkmate.
To me, all checkmates are "elegant".
The reason I consider elegant when you don't take the opponent's queen, is because often queens are traded. Not trading queens, or just leaving your opponent with his/hers is somewhat rare, though not as rare as sacrifices. Also, there is an element of skill involved, because if your opponent is going to go down fighting, he/she will probably bring the queen to defend the King in the final moves of the game. Leaving the queen out of the final moves is elegant, if the queen is on the board.
How about this one:
Bayer - Falkbeer, 1852
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. b4 Bxb4 5. c3 Ba5 6. d4 exd4 7. O-O d6 8. Qb3 Qf6 9. cxd4 Bb6 10. e5 dxe5 11. dxe5 Qg6 12. Nh4 Qh5 13. e6 fxe6 14. Bxe6 Bxe6 15. Qxe6+ Nge7 16. Nf3 Rf8 17. Bg5 Rxf3 18. Bxe7 Nd4 19. Qe4 Rf4 20. Qxb7 Kxe7 21. Qxa8 Ne2+ 22. Kh1 Qxh2+ 23. Kxh2 Rh4+ 0-1
Originally posted by rheymansAGHHHH...You aint got no sensahumor.
Oh come on, not all checkmates are elegant. When you have two rooks, and your opponent just has a King, it's not elegant. I'll concede that Xanthos game had a really slick checkmate.
The reason I consider elegant when you don't take the opponent's queen, is because often queens are traded. Not trading queens, or just leaving your opponent with his ...[text shortened]... of the game. Leaving the queen out of the final moves is elegant, if the queen is on the board.