GameKnot: Chess related, Chess etiquette....

Chess related: Chess etiquette....

« Back to forum

Pages:

« Previous

From

Message

blake78613
20-May-09, 16:35

"2) "I'm no quitter!" This is the rationale of people who drink themselves to death."

Also the rational of most successful people in chess and life.

shema_yisrael
20-May-09, 17:17

Reply to blake 78613

True, true. But on the other hand, Marcel Duchamp quit being an artist and became a chess master. Paul
Gauguin quit being a stock broker and became a great painter. Jesus quit being a carpenter...

blake78613
20-May-09, 21:42

When did Duchamp quit being an artist?

shema_yisrael
23-May-09, 16:08

Reply to blake78613

From Wikipedia: "Upon his return to Paris in 1923, Duchamp was, in essence, no longer a practicing artist.
Instead, he played chess, which he studied for the rest of his life to the exclusion of most other activities."

blake78613
23-May-09, 18:43

Duchamp completed Étant donnés in 1966. I think is last attempts at competitive chess was the 1933 Olympiads and French Championships.

fmgaijin
25-May-09, 20:06

Blake has it right

1. His final "traditional" artwork (named above) was a major piece that he worked on for the last 20 years of his life, much to the surprise of the art world.
2. In the 1940's and 50's Duchamp did work on chess problems and endgame theory even while being primarily inactive OTB other than his "performance art" match with the avante garde composer John Cage where the game was incidental to the production of random "music" from a synthesizer linked to pieces and board.
3. However, Duchamp also took part in "installation" art and "performance" art as an exhibition designer during those decades, which in the view of many today is also "art."

So he never "really" left the art world at all, even in one argues that his problems and studies do not count as "real art."

boeingeng
23-Oct-09, 17:09

When to resign

I am currently in a game where I have king and rook against my opponent's king. It's a very simple and obvious win for me. To not win (draw) I would have to blunder and loose the rook or not know how to move the pieces and exceed 50 moves to checkmate, or perhaps let him work me into a stalemate. My opponent has now slowed down and is using the full three days between each move which he did not do prior to having a lost position. I could understand a beginner not understanding that the game is lost and wanting to play it out to learn something, however we are both rated 1700+ and this is an ending that I understood at age 10. At the rate that he is now playing, it will take a couple of months for me to checkmate (20 -25 more moves). I know that he has every right to play this way but considering that we played the first 50 moves in a couple of weeks, this guy seems to be a bad sport. Had I had his position, I would have resigned several moves back. There are all kinds of people in the world, this on will be on my ignore list for sure.

coopershawk
24-Oct-09, 10:37

Different etiquette question.

Hypothetically, suppose you are playing against a player who is rated a couple of hundred
points less than you, and he plays an off-beat opening that is not very good. The opening is
so strange that you look in the GK data base and discovered that the guy plays this opening
a LOT- virtually every game he can. Against lower rated players he gets some wins,
apparently just because the opening is so off-beat they don't know what to do, and there isn't
a book to follow. Against players who understand basic opening principals and are not in the
habit of dropping pieces, he simply loses. After the game is over, and presumably after you
have won, would you:
A) Mind your own business, say thanks for the game, and move on.
Say thanks for the game, and politely suggest he learn a different opening.
C) Say thanks for the game, politely suggest he learn a different opening, and point out
some of the specific reasons why his opening is causing him to lose.
D) None of the above.

If it matters, you have good reason to believe that the player is an adult. He has played on
GK for years and completed several thousand games.

tactical_abyss
24-Oct-09, 12:34

Funny how opinions differ about etiquette vs resigning a game with anything from Rook vs Rook and King endings to other piece advantages and mates in "x"amts of moves... ect ect.
I have had many opponents over the years down pieces against me and I don't even consider the "words" of chess etiquette if they decide to play on.I'm just as happy if they want to see me mate them.If they stall but are following the rules...well so what?Complain?Thats not going to get you anywhere,and can lead to possibly a loss,if the stalling opponent gets under your hide and you get too emotional and possibly make a mistake.The win will come,one way or another.Patience is a virtue and with correspondence play one can expect all kinds of opponents out there.Polished and experienced players do not even bring up the subject of "etiquette".If a player wants to play till the end...well,so be it.
Keep in mind one thing....any player on either side of the board can make a mistake causing a sudden upset of the game.For example,I just recently resigned a game that I had a positional edge on that opponent!!Well,what happened?I had my move planned out with a few conditional moves.I was tired that day from work and also had one of those bad days at work.
I came home checked my notes and for some reason plugged in my conditional move before my next regular move!I immediately resigned the game as I immediately afterwords realized my blunder.So,against this strong opponent I resigned.But whats the
lesson here?The lesson is that if a 2400 player can make a mistake like that(rare,but it can happen),then a much less rated player with a Rook and King vs a lone King can make a mistake
as well.So, should a player always resign simply because he is down major material or in a mating net?Absolutely not.I have had countless games where players were also "up"material,even a queen on me and i managed to "squeek"out a draw or the other player timed-out.Heck,my last win was with a timed-out player.I had him in a mating net and he wanted to reinstate the game again with a mating net!I could have gained another couple of points but did not take advantage of this...but could have!Again,anything can happen in corresp play.Have patience,the end will come sooner or later...

baronderkilt
24-Oct-09, 20:01

cascadejames ...

I would go with (A) myself.
Maybe he wants that opening named after him and writing a book on it ... If he opening were really strange enough, I might ask him where he got it out of irresistible curiosity !? Or maybe a guy at work plays it and he is looking for the most crushing refutation to unleash upon his nemesis?! ! }8-)

billyjaxin
26-Oct-09, 17:45

I sometimes offer to resign and ask my opponent if (s)he wants to play it out for practice. Capitulating every time the game becomes unbalanced not only robs you of the slim chance of a win/draw but also leaves you weak in end game strategy.
I'm not a strong player (1400-ish) and at this level we make lots of errors. But also at this level we should be focused on learning the game, rather than just racking up meaningless points.
Chess is also a game of patient strategy. If we can't do that, maybe we should switch to snowboarding.
My ignorant opinion only, but it works for me.

pawncaster
14-Dec-09, 14:37

it's a question of ettiquete

when I play a strong player- I resign when I know I am lost. Probably that is one or two moves after they know it- haha.

Versus weaker players I will usually resign unless I can see a legitimate way to complicate the path to victory. Most likely though I already did this when I was just worse and not yet lost.

Playing to the bitter end in a hopeless position with a time control of 3days per move is perfectly legal, but shows no grace.

untateve
16-Dec-09, 03:56

Mentored Guidance I have received from a 2200+ player

"You learn most from a hopeless game when you keep playing and try to figure out the best moves, checkmates,positional moves and more. Then your insight grows and your skill grows. And at some point you will notice that your former hopeless games are far from lost when you look at them again. In the end, the difference will be that you do not have to think about the solutions you will just know the solutions. So giving up such a game is a waste because it is the best learning experience. Ten hours of hopeless game time is worth 1000 hours of winning game time."

It would appear that there are widely varying views on when to resign and the benefits from playing "lost" games.

lighttotheright
17-Dec-09, 07:55

In a technically lost game, there still might be opportunities for a draw. A good opponent seeing what you are attempting to do might make an error trying to avoid that draw. Reversal of fortunes in chess happen quite often. You cannot take advantage of them unless you are still in the game.

easy19
17-Dec-09, 08:26

it just depends..

what is a lost game.

there are games i will resign just because my opponent is the better player and the position is lost no matter what i try.
but against the mid range players the same game could be far from lost just because i am the more experienced player. and they need to prove me wrong.

I also find it a show off character wen people play on until the checkmate. but only wen the are not stalling the game and just keep moving. And if so i do not care how lost the position is and it just becomes a chess puzzle or a end game exercise or a learning experience..

A other thing that i find more important is that people talk to me.
It is like the handshake before the game starts, so just a single hello or good luck is the least i expect wen a new game starts. Wen there is no talk at all, i start to wonder what i am playing and not who i am playing with. i find that sometimes very annoying..

garos
17-Dec-09, 21:11

Easy19

I'm with you on the 'Hello', but unfortunately, many times when I say 'Hello', or 'Hi from Australia',
or some such comment, I get absolutely nothing back. It sort of makes you feel stupid, so often
I leave it to my opponent to open the conversation. Then, eventually, I'll greet someone, and
might do this until I get another no reply. I have found, too, that comments on moves etc,
during the game often go unacknowledged. It's not as if it is speed chess and there is no time to
be friendly with your opponent!

maca
18-Dec-09, 12:21

...

When I play chess, I play chess. If I want to chat, I can do it in forums, clubs or wherever. You shouldn't take it as a sign of rudeness if your opponent doesn't reply yours greets in a game played over the Internet. To me, it's a bit different from OTB.

Regards,
MaCa.

Pages:

« Previous

« Back to forum