Would You Have Resigned?

This thread sounds like philosophy or psychology homework.🙂

Originally posted by moon1969
The main reason I resign in a lost position (and where the opponent is knowledgable and thus it highly unlikely he will give me a stalemate) is that continuing playing game is a waste of time for me.

It is not good practice, for example, to have your K chased around the board by your opponents pieces into a non-stalemate sure-mate position.

Or eve ...[text shortened]... pent playing another game, analyzing games, studying chess, etc., or spending time with my kids.

Indeed - my feelings exactly.

Good game posted by kbear1k. Colle/Stonewall v Kings Indian
which would not have looked out of place in Robbie's Colle thread.

For the first 7 moves we had the standard Colle/Stonewall opening
move order v the standard King's Indian move order.

There was an error in the moves Kbear posted, I was going
to correct the original post but Ramp did it.

It's odd how the bogey move stood out.
Right away I knew it would fail. 21. Nd2 QR-d8.

Desctiptive notation mixed up with algebraic. My old games are littered
with such slips back into the descriptive days.
Kbear is showing his age with this one. 😉

As I said a good game.
Bet White never expected this when he trooped out the opening
moves from 'How to Think Ahead" by Fred the Read.
That is the impression you get.
White had the opening moves off to pat. Then went all scooby doo.

Posted again so the lazy ones (I don't have to point you out, you know who are)
don't have to back track.

I hate English Descriptive notation but it was all there was when I was young - until I got my hands on the first ECOs - still have them. I've been slowly copying my old games to algebraic and noticed many many errors using the old notation - it was truly awful. I wonder if many of the old Dover classics were ever reprinted in algebaic - it woud be nice.
Question for folks who teach chess - Do you bother to teach the old notation? I've been holding off at the school I teach/coach. However, there are still some great books in English descriptive - and yes I'm showing my age :>😉 Someone commented on my USCF ID on being old - but I have a number of friends who have even older IDs.

Hi KB

Think it wise to show them only algbrais. Descriptive notation where two
squares have the same name is awafully confusing at first.

Quite a few classics have been turned into algebraic but editors just love
to stick their sneb in and alter things.

I'm thinking of Fischer's 60 which was mangled with 'imporvements'
They pulped that one and brought out a word for word, move for move copy.

Now, with kids, I would be exclusive algebraic, and may just mention descriptive notation without much detail as a history tidbit.

I grew up with descriptive. For me, I like both algebraic and descriptive. I am actually more mistake prone in algebraic because I get careless in counting/viewing squares. I will make mistakes in algebraic, such as calling a b7 a b2.

Often in my notes, I will use a bastardized combo of the two. Indeed, it just easier sometimes to write NxN or NxR, for example, especially when there is only one possibility and it is incredibly clear without question what the move.

One thing I don't really like, and I am not sure why, is the symbol notation, e.g., the symbol of a Knight instead of the letter "N". Seems distracting.

[Knowing both descriptions (Algebraic & Descriptive) helps board vision]

Next: Would you have Resigned?
Betting on an attack-ing...Chance..
I probably should have resigned by someones account. I wanted to try and squeeze
out a draw. I got lucky and snatched from the jaws of defeat.


-GIN

In that position I would not have resigned even though the connected rooks are very good. The black would still probably win. You were very lucky that your opponent agreed for a draw. Who was your opponent anyways ?