< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 4 ·
|Jul-27-09|| ||gofer: 31 Nf6+ Kh8, 32 Qxh6+ Bxh6, 33 Rh7# :-) Time to check...|
|Jul-27-09|| ||gofer: Interesting debate...
...I was always of the opinion that it was the mood of the player that dictated the choice - exactly as <BraveUlysses> says.
... I never thought that playing out an obvious mate could be "insulting"!
But now at least I see both sides of the argument...
For the players involved it probably makes no difference, but some games are remembered and discussed for years to come and some of those games come close to a thing of real beauty. As someone that looks at art and cannot create it, I would never want to see an unfinished masterpiece...
|Jul-27-09|| ||gofer: Perhaps, we could introduce a new etiquette into chess, rather like shaking hands, you could ask your opponent at your moment of doom...|
"Would you prefer that I resign or would would you like to play this out to the end?!"
Then no "insult" could be forthcoming and potentially more games would go to the bitter end...
|Jul-27-09|| ||BraveUlysses: Great idea, <Gofer>. Offering to play to the end would be a classy gesture honouring the spirit of the game. |
Then again, "Show me a good loser, and I'll show you a loser"!!
It would be amusing if you made the call too early and you then swindled a save...
|Jul-27-09|| ||boringplayer: I had a roommate who was fond of saying that the only 100% guaranteed way to lose was to resign. He played every game all the way out. I, on the other hand, was fond of giving it up when the end seemed clear and unavoidable. Personal preference.|
|Jul-27-09|| ||whiteshark: I really appreciate that. A good beginning of the week. :D|
|Jul-27-09|| ||remolino: OK, so there is mate in three:
31.Nf6+ Kh8, 32.Qxh6+ Bxh6, 33.Rh7++
Pleased to see a three-move Monday.
|Jul-27-09|| ||TheaN: Monday 27 July
Par, worse than the last three Mondays though.
Material: +& /
Candidates: Qxh6†, Rxg7†... <[Nf6†]>
Not your typical Monday where the Queen is sacced immediately. Nonetheless, if we go down the line of forcing moves, we see that both Rxg7 and Nf6† have merit also. Rxg7† isn't not forcing enough after capture, though. Nf6† is completely forcing, and thereafter follows the Queen sac.
<31.Nf6† Kh8 32.Qxh6† Bxh6 33.Rh7‡ 1-0> nice one. Time to check whether White played this and if Black played it out.
|Jul-27-09|| ||zooter: 31.Nf6+ Kh8 (only move) 32.Qxh6+ Bxh6 (only move) 33.Rh7#|
All forced and a pretty combination
|Jul-27-09|| ||Babar47: Meh.. i found Rxg7 winning easily (Kxg7 32.Qa7+ )..oh well|
|Jul-27-09|| ||OhioChessFan: I was at a Kaidanov simul a few years ago and the game began 1. e4 e5 2. Qh5 g6|
There were 2 other well played games that got to maybe 35 moves. And our hapless player above, not a junior, who played it out until he was mated. One of his friends told him after the game "Good work. You held out until the end." I realize both were oblivious to chess etiquette, but I still found it embarrassing.
|Jul-27-09|| ||TomOhio: <Summerfruit: I agree with dzechiel 100%: it's a matter of personal preference when to resign, and the whole issue has very little relevance at all.>
True, but sometimes the final combo is so interesting or surprising that you really should just let it play out. What's it take, an extra 30 seconds to finish an inevitable close? I've lost a few games when I've realized too late what was happening and felt it would be cheating my opponent of the pleasure of seeing the end.|
Resigning is supposed to be a sportsmanlike timesaver. If you're down a rook, 2 pieces and 3 pawns... or if you are down to kings and a rook or queen... and your opponent's ability to close is obvious but it's going to take twenty more moves to finish it, then you should resign. To resign with one or two moves to go to simply say you didn't get checkmated, which is why many do it, when it saves no time is just childish and unsportsmanlike. Just another example in life of how pride and dignity ("If I resign with dignity then I can keep my pride") are thought to be the same thing when in reality they're not. It's hubris.
|Jul-27-09|| ||lost in space: I love Monday's:
31. Nf6+ Kh8 32. Qxh6+ Bxh6 33. Rh7#
|Jul-27-09|| ||gofer: Another puzzle? Just for fun? White to move and give mate in 2 against any defense (Level: Difficult Tuesday). This took me about 5 mins to see the correct line, it shouldn't have taken that long...|
click for larger view
|Jul-27-09|| ||johnlspouge: Monday (Very Easy):
W Fairhurst vs Menchik, 1935 (31.?)
White to play and win.
Material: N+P for B. The Black Kh7 has 2 legal moves, both on the back rank. The White Nd5 can reach f6: with Rf7 on the 7-th rank, Arabian mate is in the air. Forcing candidates reveal a mate, so there is no need to assess further.
Candidates (31.): Nf6+
31.Nf6+ Kh8 32.Qxh6+ Bxh6 33.Rh7#
|Jul-27-09|| ||xiko9: first i looked to Rxg7+ and then Qa7+, but after I found that the king can't move to g8 so the mate is possible...good puzzle|
|Jul-27-09|| ||YetAnotherAmateur: Mate in 3, all forced:
31. Nf6+ Kh8
32. Qxh6+ Bxh6
|Jul-27-09|| ||TheTamale: Kind of hard for a Monday, but let's give it up for TheTamale--he hung in there and got it, moving the pieces around only in his head, thereby relying solely upon his sub par intellect and abysmal powers of visualization.|
|Jul-27-09|| ||gtgloner: Does anyone know if Mr. Fairhurst ever became a member of the "Vera" club?|
|Jul-27-09|| ||Samagonka: Took me a while but I got it.|
|Jul-27-09|| ||newzild: Re: the resign-or-play-it-out debate.
I still remember one particular tourney back when I was a 1750 player. I had the black side of a Benoni against a 2100 international player. He played what looked like a very strong attacking move and after a lot of thought, maybe 30 or 40 minutes, I found a counter-intuitive move, retreating my KN to h7. This led to an attack that quickly became winning for me. My opponent played it right out to the end, even though a crowd had gathered round to see the patzer knock over the big boy. I found the strongest moves all the way through to the mate, on move 25.
I still treasure that game - and I'm glad my opponent let me play it out. So while I agree that players should be able to resign whenever they like, I don't think a player should ever be criticised for playing on.
|Jul-27-09|| ||Patriot: 31.Nf6+ Kh8 32.Qxh6+ Bxh6 33.Rh7#
|Jul-27-09|| ||percyblakeney: <Does anyone know if Mr. Fairhurst ever became a member of the "Vera" club?>|
This seems to be the only game they played, the most prominent names of the club were probably Euwe, Reshevsky, Sultan Khan, Sämisch, Colle and Yates. Becker apparently stated in Karlsbad 1929 that such a club should be opened for masters that lost to her, and immediately became the first member.
Kmoch wrote in the tournament book that a Viennese master had vowed to go on stage as a ballerina if Menchik scored more than three points (she ended up on exactly three points). Kmoch writes that he doesn't want to give the name of the player, but reveals that it begins with K and ends with ch...
|Jul-27-09|| ||percyblakeney: Menchik did have some good results later in her career though, the year before this game she finished ahead of for example Spielmann in Maribor:|
|Jul-27-09|| ||alexrawlings: Somewhat unrelated to the comments above re resigning/not resigning: When playing internet chess I find it infuriating when opponents 'leave' rather than resign as on some websites this counts as an unfinished game rather than a win. Of course this doesn't apply to OTB chess but was wondering if anyone else suffers the same problem.|
Oh, and I got the puzzle, but it's only Monday so I'll try and keep my feet on the ground for now!
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 4 ·