Go back
Should he have played on?

Should he have played on?

Only Chess

NS
blunderer of pawns

Rhode (not an)Island

Joined
17 Apr 04
Moves
24785
Clock
10 Aug 04
Vote Up
Vote Down

508228

My opponenet has resigned in this position. Obviously he can't take my rook or my bishop, because he's facing two different mate threats. But he's not obligated to take either piece. In fact, it seems that after 39.Qb1 Ra2 40.h3, the mate threats are over which means his queen is free. So I'm pretty much forced to play 40.....Rf1+ 41.Qxf1 Bxf1 42.Kxf1 and go into a rook vs. two bishops endgame. I don't think I'm likely to lose this endgame, but I also highly doubt I could win it. So the question is, for those of you who still don't know where I'm going with this, should he have played on?

P.S. I have noticed that Dustinrogers has an astronomical amount of games active, and this may have factored into his decision to resign this game.

T

Joined
07 Apr 03
Moves
130055
Clock
10 Aug 04
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Natural Science
508228

My opponenet has resigned in this position. Obviously he can't take my rook or my bishop, because he's facing two different mate threats. But he's not obligated to take either piece. In fact, it seems that after 39.Qb1 Ra2 40.h3, the mate threats are over which means his queen is free. So I'm pretty much forced to play 40.....Rf1+ 4 ...[text shortened]... omical amount of games active, and this may have factored into his decision to resign this game.
When I have 150 games going, it factors in heavily. You look at the board and see that there are mates threats everywhere and you must lose your queen and boom, you resign because there isn't enough time to look at it further to see if there is a saving grace. It's a problem, but us people that play a lot of games bring it upon ourself.

But I think he should have played on. (Not saying so much coming from me, a 1250 player 🙂)

-TT

C

the Netherlands

Joined
10 Jul 04
Moves
1396
Clock
10 Aug 04
1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Instead of 42.Kxf1, White could play 42.d6+, picking up the remaining rook with a comfortable win.

NS
blunderer of pawns

Rhode (not an)Island

Joined
17 Apr 04
Moves
24785
Clock
11 Aug 04
1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Citanul
Instead of 42.Kxf1, White could play 42.d6+, picking up the remaining rook with a comfortable win.
No, in the line I displayed my rook ended up on a2.

Edit: sorry I didn't put in a link in my original post...here it is.
Game 508228

C

the Netherlands

Joined
10 Jul 04
Moves
1396
Clock
11 Aug 04
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Natural Science
[b]No, in the line I displayed my rook ended up on a2.
Ah sorry, I thought it was a new line. Anyway, after 39.Qb1 Ra2 White can play 40.Bf3 closing the f file. Seems White is fine either way.

Regards.

T

Joined
11 Jul 03
Moves
8101
Clock
11 Aug 04
Vote Up
Vote Down

For me it also looks like resignation of the won game. But black's idea was nice, though, unsound and it gave the result:-)

no1marauder
Naturally Right

Somewhere Else

Joined
22 Jun 04
Moves
42677
Clock
11 Aug 04
1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

M

Joined
12 Mar 03
Moves
44411
Clock
11 Aug 04
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Natural Science
508228

My opponenet has resigned in this position. Obviously he can't take my rook or my bishop, because he's facing two different mate threats. But he's not obligated to take either piece. In fact, it seems that after 39.Qb1 Ra2 40.h3, the mate threats are over which means his queen is free. So I'm pretty much forced to play 40.....Rf1+ 4 ...[text shortened]... omical amount of games active, and this may have factored into his decision to resign this game.
White should have played on to win. Your line is not complete: Qb1 Rf1+ Qxf1 Bxf1 d6+! Kxd6 Bxa8 leaves white with 2 bishops vs. 1 plus a pawn.

Perhaps even better for white is 39.d6+ Kd7 (if Kxd6 then Qd2+ Kc7 h4 and the threats are gone and white should win) 40.Qb1 and we are back at the line as above.

NS
blunderer of pawns

Rhode (not an)Island

Joined
17 Apr 04
Moves
24785
Clock
12 Aug 04
1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Mephisto2
White should have played on to win. Your line is not complete: Qb1 Rf1+ Qxf1 Bxf1 d6+! Kxd6 Bxa8 leaves white with 2 bishops vs. 1 plus a pawn.

Perhaps even better for white is 39.d6+ Kd7 (if Kxd6 then Qd2+ Kc7 h4 and the threats are ...[text shortened]... and white should win) 40.Qb1 and we are back at the line as above.
Actually, in the line I suggested, my other rook is on a2 already. Although now as someone else already stated, White can close down the f file now with Bf3. I would not play the check on f1 with my rook still on a8.

Thanks eveyone for your insight into this position. I thought it was a nice tactical idea to try since I was in trouble earlier, and I saw his rating declining rapidly so I figured he was cleaning out his losing games.

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.