A won position is a won position, engine +2 or +8 is essentially the same. It is often wise to go for simplification even giving back some material to get a simple win instead of entering complications where you risk to miss a defensive resource.
I agree that we should not be too critical in a winning position, but it was a fair point that there is still a reasonable gap between +2 and +8, enough so that even in a winning position, a winning position does not win itself! You still have to fightitout and mustn't take a winning position for granted.
#12
A won position does win itself: it is enough not to make mistakes. The more complicated a position is, the higher the risk of a mistake, so it is often better to settle for a less crushing advantage in a simpler position.
A won position does win itself: it is enough not to make mistakes. The more complicated a position is, the higher the risk of a mistake, so it is often better to settle for a less crushing advantage in a simpler position.
@tpr
"A won position does win itself"
No.
"the higher the risk of a mistake, so it is often better to settle for a less crushing advantage in a simpler position."
That is right, but I don't want to become this sort of player. I want to play real chess.
"A won position does win itself"
No.
"the higher the risk of a mistake, so it is often better to settle for a less crushing advantage in a simpler position."
That is right, but I don't want to become this sort of player. I want to play real chess.
#14
Simplification is real chess.
"An endgame with an extra pawn is won, the plan is to queen the pawn.
An endgame with an extra piece is won, the plan is to trade the piece for a pawn." - Capablanca
So the way to win a +3 position is to convert it to a simpler +1 position.
Likewise a messy +8 position is not as safe as a simple +2 position.
Simplification is real chess.
"An endgame with an extra pawn is won, the plan is to queen the pawn.
An endgame with an extra piece is won, the plan is to trade the piece for a pawn." - Capablanca
So the way to win a +3 position is to convert it to a simpler +1 position.
Likewise a messy +8 position is not as safe as a simple +2 position.
@tpr that is understandable in the endgame, but we were far away from that. a won opening or middlegame position isn't as won as a tablegame endgame position, there is a difference. also I consider getting two queens instead of going for a mate in #3 coward chess. and I have been a coward myself OTB, but only bcs it is new to me. I am certainly planning on changing that. I am playing for the beauty of chess, not for the win.
I would have seen both moves, assuming I have enough time. Ke7 in the Nxd6 line would have worried me until I find Rb6 and have made sure that Nd7 or Nd5 attacking the rook does not work and there is no other hidden tactic. Then I would have calculated the Rxc7 line (including what to play on Kc8), and probably I would have played that because it is more forcing. Not sure if I had seen the fact that Be6 protects a2 or that I can take on d6 with my d1 rook after which black can not activate his h-rook, like he can in the first line.
I would have needed at least five minutes to see all this, including the relevant fact that black can not activate his rook, without that just 30 seconds. People who regularly train calculation see this in a few seconds.
In time trouble I would just have calculated the first line and would have played it as soon as I see that it is enough to win. In extreme time trouble I would have calculated nothing and would have played Rxc7 out of a gut feeling.
I would have needed at least five minutes to see all this, including the relevant fact that black can not activate his rook, without that just 30 seconds. People who regularly train calculation see this in a few seconds.
In time trouble I would just have calculated the first line and would have played it as soon as I see that it is enough to win. In extreme time trouble I would have calculated nothing and would have played Rxc7 out of a gut feeling.
@selfbrain 5 minutes?! how so fast :D I would need like 20 minutes for it. I have the gut feeling too now looking at it, but I couldn't be completely sure within 5 minutes... wow
It is not fast, really.
A won position does not win itself, effort has to be put in to continue an advantage. As Judit Polgar has said once,
"Its a mistake to think in a winning position, that you should get too excited, that I have seen many players lose from their winning positions."
So no, a winning position (is not always) a clear cut 'won' position.
"Its a mistake to think in a winning position, that you should get too excited, that I have seen many players lose from their winning positions."
So no, a winning position (is not always) a clear cut 'won' position.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.