When your Queen is lost...

Originally posted by Mad Rook
The first video clip from the top of the page:

http://www.chessvibes.com/tournaments/baku-fide-grand-prix-r11-wang-yue-joins-grischuk-again/

i bet that hurt.

Thank you for your comments...food for thought. 🙂

Originally posted by eldragonfly
No it's true, people lose queens all the time in blitz, the outcome being very unclear.

well blitz is blitz and chess is chess 😉

Originally posted by eldragonfly
Precisely. Of course i was talking about world-class grandmasters and not your average-ish chess players. Thanks for setting the record straight. 🙄

Yeah, Capablanca and Botvinnik are very "average-ish" as you put it (despite being world champions for some time).

Originally posted by eldragonfly
Precisely. Of course i was talking about world-class grandmasters and not your average-ish chess players. Thanks for setting the record straight. 🙄

Calling Capablanca and Botvinnik "average-ish chess players" you are showing your ignorace (again).

If I have drawing chances then I will play on. Once I obviously cannot win and I am being stubborn I will respectfully resign.

Originally posted by Evey Hammond
I've had many opponents who have resigned after an error that resulted in the loss of their Queen. But when I make this mistake and lose mine, I have had a few games where I've played on and managed not only to capture my opponent's Queen, but also to manage checkmate.

What do you guys think? Lose your Queen and resign? Or not?

It really depends on what you think of your opponent. If I'm playing someone on my skill level or higher and I'm down a full queen, I would not play on (I probably wouldn't even play on down a full rook unless I felt I had some positional compensation). However, if I'm playing a weaker opponent, I'll play until I'm completely and irredeemably lost.

I don't think there's a "right" or "wrong" answer though. It's everyone's right to resign and everyone's right to play on in any position.

Originally posted by diskamyl
well blitz is blitz and chess is chess 😉

This i understand, go back and read the entire thread savantman.

Originally posted by kbaumen
Yeah, Capablanca and Botvinnik are very "average-ish" as you put it (despite being world champions for some time).

lookey here girls i didn't say that, you are quite the foolish ones. 🙄

Originally posted by sh76
I don't think there's a "right" or "wrong" answer though. It's everyone's right to resign and everyone's right to play on in any position.

rocket science my dear man, rocket science. 😉

Originally posted by eldragonfly
lookey here girls i didn't say that, you are quite the foolish ones. 🙄

Directly quoted from eldragonfly: Of course i was talking about world-class grandmasters and not your average-ish chess players.

I'm afraid I must have misunderstood you. Please make your future posts clearer.

Originally posted by mjolnir
Directly quoted from eldragonfly: Of course i was talking about world-class grandmasters and not your average-ish chess players.

I'm afraid I must have misunderstood you. Please make your future posts clearer.

you are taking my quote out of context, look at the idiotic comment it was made in response to. 😵

Originally posted by eldragonfly
you are taking my quote out of context, look at the idiotic comment it was made in response to. 😵

If readers of this thread have misunderstood your post then please feel free to understand what did you mean with "average-ish chess players".

Originally posted by wittywonka
I personally have a tendency to finish games I play in person (OTB) more often than those I play on this website. The immediate pressure to convert an advantage into a win is actually a factor in OTB, while in correspondence chess the winning side can take his time and have a fresh look each turn.

Exactly. In OTB I've seen "won" positions where the player (up say a queen, and maybe even a rook!) put the opposing king into stalemate and hence a draw due to carelessness. The clock is your friend in a losing position. Draw up complications and your opponent will feel extra pressure to win and may blunder under time pressure.

I have no problems with players not resigning as I tend to resign late myself.

I don't understand why some people resign at the first sign of a loss. The reason most professional players resign after even a pawn advantage is that they can see the result of the game way before a person like me can. They can also better judge how their opponent is playing.

BUT

To me continuing to fight in an obviously lost position is just going for a cheap win. Although a win is a win.