Nobody resigns?

Originally posted by rubberjaw30
dont forget...
you, like me, are in the 1300-1400 range...
this means that even in a winnable position, we might screw up...
the opponent is playing the odds that you'll make a mistake...
even if it's a stalemate...
play with, like someone earlier said, either 1/7, 1/14, or 3/7 time controls...

Too true, I make more silly blunders than most, especially when I am bored to tears in a trivial endgame.

The trouble is, the more I play, the less interested in the result i get.

I want to learn to play well and I am not interested in fighting to the death over trivial endings.

The only thing that keeps me from resigning/offering a draw. is that I need to get my rating up.

Originally posted by petrosianpupil
Too true, I make more silly blunders than most, especially when I am bored to tears in a trivial endgame.

The trouble is, the more I play, the less interested in the result i get.

I want to learn to play well and I am not interested in fighting to the death over trivial endings.

The only thing that keeps me from resigning/offering a draw. is that I need to get my rating up.

Trivial endings win games.

The stronger you get the smaller the advantage. In most circumstances is is usually something as trivial as a better placed pawn that wins it for the stronger side. Strong players rarely throw away pieces and overlook simple mates. They do do it (even Kramnik missed a mate in 1) but it is rare and not how they win most games.

Originally posted by Dragon Fire
Trivial endings win games.

The stronger you get the smaller the advantage. In most circumstances is is usually something as trivial as a better placed pawn that wins it for the stronger side. Strong players rarely throw away pieces and overlook simple mates. They do do it (even Kramnik missed a mate in 1) but it is rare and not how they win most games.

But that is precisely my point.

I want to play endgames with a slight advantage. I love endgames like that, they can be awesome.

At the moment I am playing a match with two pawns and a bishop against just a king. My opponent has just offered me a draw!

Originally posted by techsouth
Seems like subscribing is a much simpler solution than could be offered by RHP. Would you have RHP offer unlimited games to non-subscribers? What reasons are left to subscribe? I don't see how RHP can insulate you from those who abuse the system other than funding this site out of their own money at great personal expense.

While it is wrong to drag g ...[text shortened]... nk 6 games at a time for free (along with a valid rating) is more than fair as a free service.

I don't remember saying anything regarding unlimited games to non subscibers. The only point I made was that it seemed rather tactless for someone to annoy another person and then tell them to subscibe.

Originally posted by techsouth
Seems like subscribing is a much simpler solution than could be offered by RHP. Would you have RHP offer unlimited games to non-subscribers? What reasons are left to subscribe? I don't see how RHP can insulate you from those who abuse the system other than funding this site out of their own money at great personal expense.

While it is wrong to drag g ...[text shortened]... nk 6 games at a time for free (along with a valid rating) is more than fair as a free service.

but to have to sit there in six games where 2 of them are on move three in Petroff's defence (a boring line) and the other three, your opponent is taking a week per move to drag out a lost endgame, it is somewhat unfair/boring to that player...
im not saying that we need more than six...
i'm saying that people need to be curteous...
i'm rated 1350
i'm not going to blunder away a won endgame
now obviously, i wont expect someone to resign if i only have a slight winning advantage with chances for blunders...
but when i have a king and rook, do me a favor and resign...
i dont want to spend 4 months driving you into a corner...

Originally posted by rubberjaw30
but to have to sit there in six games where 2 of them are on move three in Petroff's defence (a boring line) and the other three, your opponent is taking a week per move to drag out a lost endgame, it is somewhat unfair/boring to that player...
im not saying that we need more than six...
i'm saying that people need to be curteous...
i'm rated 1350
i' ...[text shortened]... ook, do me a favor and resign...
i dont want to spend 4 months driving you into a corner...

I'm watching a 1500 player blunder an endgame.😀

Originally posted by Diet Coke
I'm watching a 1500 player blunder an endgame.😀

how often does that happen?
i'm asking for courtesy, that's all...over the board, never resign
ever...
but on a friendly chess site, resign (unless its a tournament game or something like that)

I don't know, I don't usually watch endgames between two other players. Plus I don't reach many endgames in my game.

Originally posted by Diet Coke
I don't know, I don't usually watch endgames between two other players. Plus I don't reach many endgames in my game.

that's because you're a loser...
anyway...
i might even start playing the dreaded (for me) 1. d4 openings...
i played this opening today for the first time against a friend (Captain Bejnood on this site)
he, upon my first move, said:
"rubberjaw, you don't know how to play Queen's Pawn Openings"
and he proceeded to beat me after 1. ... d5 and 2. ... e6
any free sites with useful info on how to best play these lines?
don't tell me wiki or simple gogle...i need a specific site rather than spending hours flipping through the google lists...

Originally posted by rubberjaw30
that's because you're a loser...
anyway...
i might even start playing the dreaded (for me) 1. d4 openings...
i played this opening today for the first time against a friend (Captain Bejnood on this site)
he, upon my first move, said:
"rubberjaw, you don't know how to play Queen's Pawn Openings"
and he proceeded to beat me after 1. ... d5 and 2. .. ...[text shortened]... ...i need a specific site rather than spending hours flipping through the google lists...

Calling me a loser is supposed to get me to help you?

Play.

1. c4
2. g3
3. Bg2

And shut up.

Originally posted by Diet Coke
Calling me a loser is supposed to get me to help you?

Play.

1. c4
2. g3
3. Bg2

And shut up.

i call at least thirty people losers in any given day
don't take it personally...
also, i am seriosly considering an overhaul of my white opening repertoire to begin with
scrapping 1. e4 for a while...
either the English, as you suggested, 1. d4, or Andersson's Opening (1. a3)
i'm leaning towards Andersson's because i get to play as black without any preliminary threats of check on b4 (basically, i would play the Caro-Kann where black's bishop can't check at b4

Originally posted by rubberjaw30
that's because you're a loser...
anyway...
i might even start playing the dreaded (for me) 1. d4 openings...
i played this opening today for the first time against a friend (Captain Bejnood on this site)
he, upon my first move, said:
"rubberjaw, you don't know how to play Queen's Pawn Openings"
and he proceeded to beat me after 1. ... d5 and 2. .. ...i need a specific site rather than spending hours flipping through the google lists...

Game 3234080

Here's a recent win of mine against.

1. d5...2. e6



My opponent resigned nice and early too.

Originally posted by rubberjaw30
i call at least thirty people losers in any given day
don't take it personally...
also, i am seriosly considering an overhaul of my white opening repertoire to begin with
scrapping 1. e4 for a while...
either the English, as you suggested, 1. d4, or Andersson's Opening (1. a3)
i'm leaning towards Andersson's because i get to play as black without an ...[text shortened]... check on b4 (basically, i would play the Caro-Kann where black's bishop can't check at b4

a3? White starts with the advantage of moving first and immediately hands it to black? The purpose of the opening is to control the centre - play e4, d4 or c4 and you'll still get plenty of variety.
Develop knights before bishops and b4 is meaningless. Anyway, you can also castle.

When I said definitive loss, I'm not saying a theoretical loss. I'm talking about those positions at a given level of play where one side is clearly losing, and the path forward is relatively simple for the winning player regardless.

There's nothing wrong at all with a losing player who is able to complicate the board doing just that when doing so has a decent chance of causing a blunder on the winning side. However, at a certain point, it should become obvious whether or not such attempts will succeed or not, including attempts to induce drawn positions.

It just gets annoying when an opponent who has clearly lost the game, and with no ability to initiate any serious counterplay, forces you to mate in order to win.

Originally posted by buffalobill
a3? White starts with the advantage of moving first and immediately hands it to black? The purpose of the opening is to control the centre - play e4, d4 or c4 and you'll still get plenty of variety.
Develop knights before bishops and b4 is meaningless. Anyway, you can also castle.

bah humbug
that advantage only appears in master-GM games...
i like playing Caro-Kann as black more than anything as white...
mainly, i havent decided on any white openings i like...
so, yes, at my level (1400 ish)
1. a3 is no flaw
play could go:
1. a3!? e5
2. c3 d5
3. d4
and we have a Caro-Kann where black can not threaten any future checks at b4