The last time I accepted a draw was my opponent had a pawn and a bishop while I had a pawn and two bishops, but I had less than 5 min(10 min less than his). So I took the offer, since his rating is slightly higher than mine. I think it’s a great deal.
very very good Blog NoelStuder sir!
U tweakin’ rn dawg. I’m from da streets foo’. Niggas gon’ slide fr. Niggas ain’t tryna draw homie
Well that's true sometimes u shouldn't offer a draw cuz that will make u lose ur opportunity to learn from ur mistake
What a waste of space!
Two draws got offered, both for good reasons, in this game: lichess.org/mkGwukuk/black#82
I played black, clearly not knowing how to win the endgame, and I didn't want my opponent to repeat moves. OTB I could slump over, and appear as if I'd eagerly accept a three fold repetition, but online my body language seems to have no effect on my opponents. At my level and in online chess, the draws get offered in lost positions mostly. So I offered a draw to appear weak to my opponent (precisely one of the points made in the blog posts btw!). It made them confident enough to play for a win and they avoided a repetition of moves, instead making a big mistake and offering a draw three moves after that, just checking if I'd still be up for that draw (with mate in 1 was on the board, that was bit of an idle hope).
The points of the blog post still stand though: I would've learned more if I hadn't used this risky shortcut and spent the 2 minutes I had on the clock calculating and coming up with a plan. (I did ask stockfish for a plan after the game and learned from that).
I played black, clearly not knowing how to win the endgame, and I didn't want my opponent to repeat moves. OTB I could slump over, and appear as if I'd eagerly accept a three fold repetition, but online my body language seems to have no effect on my opponents. At my level and in online chess, the draws get offered in lost positions mostly. So I offered a draw to appear weak to my opponent (precisely one of the points made in the blog posts btw!). It made them confident enough to play for a win and they avoided a repetition of moves, instead making a big mistake and offering a draw three moves after that, just checking if I'd still be up for that draw (with mate in 1 was on the board, that was bit of an idle hope).
The points of the blog post still stand though: I would've learned more if I hadn't used this risky shortcut and spent the 2 minutes I had on the clock calculating and coming up with a plan. (I did ask stockfish for a plan after the game and learned from that).
Hi,
I think team competitions should be an exception.
If the team reaches a goal (i.e. to win the competition with that draw),
you should certainly try to get the draw or to accept a draw offer.
Well, and to play on something like K+R against K+R shows poor sportmanship and
nothing else.
I think team competitions should be an exception.
If the team reaches a goal (i.e. to win the competition with that draw),
you should certainly try to get the draw or to accept a draw offer.
Well, and to play on something like K+R against K+R shows poor sportmanship and
nothing else.
I like the article, but I don't understand how after a few losses in good positions the confidence of the student grew tremendiously. I would start losing confidence.
На фото, боец ЧВК Вагнер.
@ApplePieGambit said in #48:
> I like the article, but I don't understand how after a few losses in good positions the confidence of the student grew tremendiously. I would start losing confidence.
I think the writer meant to convey that the results were not immediate but that it did pay off in the long run.
> I like the article, but I don't understand how after a few losses in good positions the confidence of the student grew tremendiously. I would start losing confidence.
I think the writer meant to convey that the results were not immediate but that it did pay off in the long run.