lichess.org
Donate

Why do people play for cheapos in the middlegame?

I have had so many positions where I was say, 2 rooks up and they kept trying to play for cheap tricks even though completely lost. come on man, just resign.
It is always possible to blunder away and advantage.

I was once down by a queen, two horses, a castle and a king, and still won (on time).
Even if it only works once out of those 100 times, you’re going to lose anyway so it is worth a try.
@i-bex said in #5:
> You'd think a Jerome gambit enthusiast would like tricks.
haha. I actually dont know any theory but managed to draw an expert in it. The username is a funny joke. But I do like tricks yes. I had probably my most embarrasing loss today when 2 pawns up in an endgame, I blundered and turned it into an opposite bishop endgame. :-(
@TheJeromeGambit said in #1:
> I have had so many positions where I was say, 2 rooks up and they kept trying to play for cheap tricks even though completely lost. come on man, just resign.

I completely agree, I hate cheapos of any kind in chess. Usually people do it in combination with time pressure which makes me angry. Literally half of the games I lose are due to time pressure cheapos in classical. I think it's an insult to chess itself to play like this.
@TheJeromeGambit said in #1:
> I have had so many positions where I was say, 2 rooks up and they kept trying to play for cheap tricks even though completely lost. come on man, just resign.

They learned from you!
Playing for tricks is a great strategy when you're down material or in a worse position.

This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.