Chess

[Gustaran]

wishing i offfered draws when I was a pawn and a piece up, think I may drag us down here by my end game play

If your position is clearly better, don't offer a draw. It is better to play out a favourable position and lose in the end than to offer a draw because you fear your opponent's rating or doubt your abilities.

[MJW (ya that one)]

The score is now 2.5 - 0.5.
Like I said earlier: One lost pawn can cost you the game...

You cannot use yourself as an example because your not a beginner who blunders every five seconds. JKaen now has a losing position in both his games. (40...e2 41. Re1 d4 42. Kf3 d3! 43. KxR d2 and wins)

I feel that you overestimate the power of material when compared to ratings and luck. For example Fischer played a money match at knight odds against http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/c.../index.htm and won every game. Also Kaufman said Knight odds is around 50 ratings points for beginners (I would guess 700 USCF).

The conclusion is that if you are a beginner whose playing a beginner and drops knight you should not give up.

[MJW (ya that one)]

wishing i offfered draws when I was a pawn and a piece up, think I may drag us down here by my end game play

If your position is clearly better, don't offer a draw. It is better to play out a favourable position and lose in the end than to offer a draw because you fear your opponent's rating or doubt your abilities.

I would say:

1. If you are playing to learn you should offer draws unless the position is a "dead draw". You should not accept draws unless it is a "dead draw" or your position is clearly worse. As Jerry Silman says.

2. Now let's say you want to score as many points as possible. Then the situation is much different. For example you are a beginner who is playing someone rating 200 points rated higher than you. Your opponent falls into an opening trap and loses a pawn. He offers you a draw. You should totally accept as a knight is worth only 50 ratings points.

Most players who don't like draw offers don't point out the difference between 1 and 2.

I have to point out on this website and in real-life ratings can be BS. For example some players play old players who are at their rating floor to increase their rating. If you suspect that is the case then you should just really always play it out because your opponent has more of an idea of his strength than you.

[uberfish]

Actually you shouldn't care about rating points at all, playing like a chicken against stronger opponents won't help you improve at the game.

[MJW (ya that one)]

I put some thought into these issues. I now feel that not liking draws and "playing the board; not the player" are rules. However, rules have exceptions and I think I've pointed some out.

[Gustaran]

I put some thought into these issues. I now feel that not liking draws and "playing the board; not the player" are rules. However, rules have exceptions and I think I've pointed some out.

Yes, but making early draws to "gain rating points" is still bad for your chess progress. What is the point of increasing your rating if you don't play at that level? There are ususally only a few exceptions of easy draws that are widely accepted:

a) A draw secures the win for you in a tournament
b) A draw secures a rating/section prize for you
c) A draw secures the victory for your team in a team match. For example, if the score in a match was 7-6 in our favour with only one game remaining, of course I would expect our last player to accept a draw.
I used to play over the board team matches and it was even common to consult our team captain before offering or accepting a draw (not in regards to the position on the board, but the overall match score).

[Sian]

have a very good period in Tactic trainer on Chess.com ...

The 20'th i was on 1519 (which is roughly average over time for me) ... today (9 days later) i'm on 1642 :D

[Gustaran]

Nice, nice: MJW scores, gving us a 3.5-0.5 lead and his second game looks very promising as well.

But holy cow Rego, what on earth are you doing in that pawn endgame?
There is an old saying in soviet chess: "Western amateurs play the opening like grandmasters, the middlegame like experts and the endgame like beginners".
In case you decide to spend some time on chess training in the near future I suggest focusing on pawn endgames. With your rating approaching 1600 you really should be able to convert such a big advantage like you have after move 39 without any problems.

[MJW (ya that one)]

Nice, nice: MJW scores, gving us a 3.5-0.5 lead and his second game looks very promising as well.

But holy cow Rego, what on earth are you doing in that pawn endgame?
There is an old saying in soviet chess: "Western amateurs play the opening like grandmasters, the middlegame like experts and the endgame like beginners".
In case you decide to spend some time on chess training in the near future I suggest focusing on pawn endgames. With your rating approaching 1600 you really should be able to convert such a big advantage like you have after move 39 without any problems.

For rego, the problem is that Zugwang is extremely unintuitive. Were else in life were you have to suicide like that? Zugwang is very important. If you could pass Q+K vs N+K would be a draw. He might not know what Zagwang means.

My opponents poor endgame skill means I get to go 2-0 instead of 0.5-1.5 with little effort.

[regoarrarr]

Yeah - I definitely felt lost there. I did play out quite a few simulations there to try and find the best moves but (I don't remember exactly at this point) couldn't figure out how to best pass the pawns. It's an ongoing game, but maybe once it's over someone can help me mend my errors

(For the record, I do know what zugzwang means )

In better news, I am going to win my other game

http://www.chess.com/echess/game?id=75961262

after my opponent offered a rook sacrifice on move 44, hoping to queen his pawn, but not realizing that if he queened the pawn, I would mate him on the back rank. Game is still going as of this post, but up a rook I should (hopefully) win that.