Originally posted by trallphazWhenever you lose a game, it is very useful to discover where and why you went wrong. It will certainly help you to avoid making similar mistakes in the future.
so should you analyse a game in which you lost a piece like queen early or just any game you resigned?
A mistake doesn't have to be a huge blunder like losing a queen, it can be the loss of pawn, a miscalculation in the end game, or more subtle mistakes like yeilding the initiative, poor pawn structure, or a poorly defended king.
Nothing is sadder than losing a game, and not knowing why.
Originally posted by WildfireIf a player loses a queen without compensation then resigning is the best thing to do and there's not much to learn from such a game.
This is where the argument comes in. Just because a player loses their queen, they gain nothing by resigning. To me, it's far better to play it out to the bitter end, because different positions can come up that I might learn from.
Originally posted by yashsrblack just lost a knight, and was facing a devastating 'classical bishop sac' of sorts. and as if that was not enough, it was against akizy.
Why the hell did he resign?
Game 1204252
Just because it was Akizy against him?
Originally posted by JusuhIf the black won a full pawn, white could have won a knight, couldn't he? And resigning just because he is one pawn short is stupidity. If thats the case, checkmates would be as rear as Akizy losing chess games at RHP. Remember, he has only lost thrice in 288 RATED games. 😉
in fact it was white who resigned. reason is obvious; black won a full pawn giving white no compensation.
Originally posted by yashsrare we talking about the same game? I dont see anyway for white to win a knight. and resigning because he is one pawn short is stupidity, but resigning because he is one pawn short and also positionally lost is quite another matter...
If the black won a full pawn, white could have won a knight, couldn't he? And resigning just because he is one pawn short is stupidity.
1 edit
Originally posted by trallphazI would say because this is not a 5 minute game of chess and in takes months to play sometime. There is no point in lossing.
im pretty sure its because of the queen capture, but am i the only one that isnt afraid to play a game without a queen? i mean sure your chances of winning are practically cut in half, and if the person is way better cut about 75% off, but you can still win? anyone agree? ill post the game as soon as i found out how to find out the number/link thing
Game 1610623
(i did it!)
And good Chess ettiqute is to resign when all hope is lost. And so it was in your game.
Edit: he also had a p rating so maybe he desided not to play at this site? 🙁