Game 10362831
They must have been messing around there, both playing to draw, perhaps a bet they made?
If it's genuine, then may Caissa have mercy on their souls 😲
- Joined
- 18 Jan 07
- Moves
- 12466
Originally posted by 64squaresofpainBoth 1000-level players. It doesn't surprise me, I've seen worse. At 1400 I throw away pieces, at 1200 they throw away rooks, at 1000 they throw away queens and stalemates, at 800 they throw away whole games. Going higher things get too good for me to analyse with certainty, but I think that at 1600 they throw away pawns, at 1800 they throw away squares, at 2000 they throw away tempi and above that all they throw are nasty glances at the opponent.
Game 10362831
They must have been messing around there, both playing to draw, perhaps a bet they made?
If it's genuine, then may Caissa have mercy on their souls 😲
Originally posted by Shallow Bluelol nice... although i'd say anyone between 1000-1800 are still capable of throwing pieces away,
Both 1000-level players. It doesn't surprise me, I've seen worse. At 1400 I throw away pieces, at 1200 they throw away rooks, at 1000 they throw away queens and stalemates, at 800 they throw away whole games. Going higher things get too good for me to analyse with certainty, but I think that at 1600 they throw away pawns, at 1800 they throw away squares, at 2000 they throw away tempi and above that all they throw are nasty glances at the opponent.
it just happens less often the higher up you get.
1800-2000 might chuck pieces but have some compensation, say a couple pawns and tempo.
I blame a mixture of tiredness and vodka, personally.
Originally posted by 64squaresofpainThe impression I got is that they can produce plans but can't see threats which aren't related to their plans - when white was hoping to catch the h8 rook with his dark squared bishop, a plan of sorts, he spotted the opportunity to do it straight away when it happened - but they can't see anything unless they've thought of it first - they spot checks but nothing else. In a less extreme way I'm the same - I can be blissfully unaware of the killing check my opponent has because the piece giving it is not one of the active defenders so I forget about it while pursuing my attack.
lol nice... although i'd say anyone between 1000-1800 are still capable of throwing pieces away,
it just happens less often the higher up you get.
1800-2000 might chuck pieces but have some compensation, say a couple pawns and tempo.
I blame a mixture of tiredness and vodka, personally.
Their main problem is a total lack of technique - they can't even reliably promote pawns when they are defended against a lone king by a queen. I did wonder if there was some kind of attempt to throw the game at each other - it's difficult to believe that white wouldn't realise his queen was en prise to the pawn (a bishop on the other side of the board I can believe) and that black couldn't see he was stalemating white - the natural move was to give check - they are good as spotting opportunities to give check and he only had to move the queen one more square to be able to do that. If it was a genuine error then total lack of technique is the cause. They'd probably benefit from Silman's endgame manual.
The lesson for me is to do some exercises with regard to queen moves (see the last few moves of Game 10991288 for example) so I can spot them better. Does anyone know of a resource that focuses on that particularly?
Hi Paul,
Thanks. I thought the end may be a bit too long for the lads to play over.
Of course there is always a chance the players messed about but I can
only go with what I see. I've seen a few obvious faked games but this one
appears genuine.....I've seen worse!
Here:
White may have flipped the board or simply missed hxg2 when he played Qg2.
Stalemating with 2 queens on here is not rare.
- Joined
- 18 Jan 07
- Moves
- 12466
Originally posted by 64squaresofpainThat's not throwing away, though, that's saccing. Though if you've read Greenpawn's blog, you'll know that the only difference between those two is your attitude 😀
1800-2000 might chuck pieces but have some compensation, say a couple pawns and tempo.
Hi DeepThought,
..."it's difficult to believe that white wouldn't realise his queen was en prise to the pawn."
I don't, not on here anyway. (bless them all.)
One thing we must remember is that these lads are giving a
simultaneous chess display with mixed colours everytime they sit down.
If in the two or three previous games he looked at he was Black and this pops up,
There is little to guide you which way is which.
The lad simply thought the pawn was going up the board and played Qg2.
And here with Black to move.
Black played 65...Qa1+
If he wanted to to play an agreed stalemate he could have done it with 65...Qc5
Also, he could have played 65...Qga7 mate.
This was a genuine double cock-up. No wonder the PGN thing groaned.
I have 159 double Queen stalemates on RHP.
the player 'unravel' has as the lone King been stalemate twice by two Queens.
Once with White and once with Black Game 8598469 and Game 8195782
Originally posted by greenpawn34Hi greenpawn, I just had a look at the first of those two games, which has a pawn taking direction error - white lost the first of his rooks playing 53. Rd3 where it could be taken by the e-pawn. Apart from being en prise, the move makes sense as it pins the g-pawn to black's king and I can believe the idea about confusion regarding the direction the pawn is going in; except that the preceding move was 52. ... g3, the way the system highlights the to and from squares should really have been enough of a clue...
Hi DeepThought,
..."it's difficult to believe that white wouldn't realise his queen was en prise to the pawn."
I don't, not on here anyway. (bless them all.)
One thing we must remember is that these lads are giving a
simultaneous chess display with mixed colours everytime they sit down.
If in the two or three previous games he looked at he ...[text shortened]... by two Queens.
Once with White and once with Black Game 8598469 and Game 8195782
Hi Deep Thought,
I used to think that I saw it all but nothing surprises me on here.
Think of something outrageous on a chessboard and I'll see if I can find an example.
Even I've screwed up. When I was playing that 50 board simul on here to see
if I could handle 50 games. I could not. My graph Nov 12-end Dec 12 reflect this.
The games were coming thick and fast. A lot of the lads were blitzing.
I had 5-6 Latvians all appearing all at the same time.
Most played 3.Nxe5
And I played 3...Qf6
One lad, the crafty iwteisseyre, played 3.exf5 e4 4.Ne5 and when this popped up.
I saw the Knight on e5 and quickly played Qf6.
When I saw 5.Qh5+ my jaw hit the keyboard.
I resigned a few moves later (my shortest ever loss with the Latvian both on
the net, including blitz and OTB) I apologised for not giving the lad a better game.
Originally posted by greenpawn34That is some eye watering chess, no mistake! I would be really interested to see what fritz blunder check would make of that game. 😲😵🙄
A Fischer game with a tale behind it. (was it a joke?)
Ernie returns and a wee 'What Happened Puzzle'.
[fen]8/8/8/8/8/p2P1Q1p/5K1k/8 w - - 0 53[/fen]
How did this game end. (White to play) I’ll give a few clues.
White did not mate in two moves. Qg3+ and Qg1.
White did not stalemate Black. (answer at the end of the blog.}