Losing queen and then winning the gameWhat is the best way to free your queen as soon as possible?Sicilian defense : what's the best answer to 2.Qh5?Why is the king powerless and the queen powerful?How many pieces would you sack for a queen?Unlearning myths from the mind of an experienced club playerIs three knights versus knight really winning?How can one precisely sacrifice a piece for a winning attack?Why is exposing my queen for capture better in this position (According to computer analysis)?Can one win with two dark square bishops and two light square bishops and his opponent has only one queen?In the game Kudrin-Douven, why did black allow white to capture en passant two times in a row?
How did installing this RPM create a file?
Is there an equivalent of Parseval's theorem for wavelets?
What does the phrase "building hopping chop" mean here?
Who voices the character "Finger" in The Fifth Element?
What's the safest way to inform a new user of their password on an invite-only website?
Is there a legal way for US presidents to extend their terms beyond four years?
Movie in a trailer park named Paradise and a boy playing a video game then being recruited by aliens to fight in space
How do I tell the reader that my character is autistic in Fantasy?
Security Patch SUPEE-11155 - Possible issues?
Why do we use a cylinder as a Gaussian surface for infinitely long charged wire?
Does any Greek word have a geminate consonant after a long vowel?
Different budgets within roommate group
Could human civilization live 150 years in a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier colony without resorting to mass killing/ cannibalism?
Just graduated with a master’s degree, but I internalised nothing
How is this practical and very old scene shot?
Boolean Difference with Offset?
Buliding a larger matrix from a smaller one
Lifting a probability measure to the power set
Is it bad to describe a character long after their introduction?
Skipping over failed imports until they are needed (if ever)
Are all commands with an optional argument fragile?
How can my story take place on Earth without referring to our existing cities and countries?
Why were the first airplanes "backwards"?
In native German words, is Q always followed by U, as in English?
Losing queen and then winning the game
What is the best way to free your queen as soon as possible?Sicilian defense : what's the best answer to 2.Qh5?Why is the king powerless and the queen powerful?How many pieces would you sack for a queen?Unlearning myths from the mind of an experienced club playerIs three knights versus knight really winning?How can one precisely sacrifice a piece for a winning attack?Why is exposing my queen for capture better in this position (According to computer analysis)?Can one win with two dark square bishops and two light square bishops and his opponent has only one queen?In the game Kudrin-Douven, why did black allow white to capture en passant two times in a row?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
Many years ago, I was on a mountain with some people. I was very young then, between 15 and 17 years old, I think. Some older people came and one of them started to play chess with me.
I cannot recall all the details, but at one moment in the game he captured my queen and I continued to play without it. Besides being without queen, he might have had 1 or 2 of my pawns and a bishop. I also had 1 or 2 his pawns, along with 1 or 2 of his bishops.
Then I started to play very smartly, and, somehow, I manged to capture his queen with a trap made by using rooks and knights. I won the game after that.
Obviously, this is not a question about the particular game I played on the mountain. It is more about, if someone loses his queen at the beginning of the game, what are the tactics to trap and capture the other player's queen?
And also, what is the actual strength of a queen? For example, is it generally better to be without queen or without two knights and a rook but with a queen?
I would like to know more about tactics when some player lost some important pieces, but played so well that he won the game. Are there any tricks that can be used here? I am also interested in such a game in which one player loses their queen, but the other one still has theirs.
tactics queens
New contributor
add a comment |
Many years ago, I was on a mountain with some people. I was very young then, between 15 and 17 years old, I think. Some older people came and one of them started to play chess with me.
I cannot recall all the details, but at one moment in the game he captured my queen and I continued to play without it. Besides being without queen, he might have had 1 or 2 of my pawns and a bishop. I also had 1 or 2 his pawns, along with 1 or 2 of his bishops.
Then I started to play very smartly, and, somehow, I manged to capture his queen with a trap made by using rooks and knights. I won the game after that.
Obviously, this is not a question about the particular game I played on the mountain. It is more about, if someone loses his queen at the beginning of the game, what are the tactics to trap and capture the other player's queen?
And also, what is the actual strength of a queen? For example, is it generally better to be without queen or without two knights and a rook but with a queen?
I would like to know more about tactics when some player lost some important pieces, but played so well that he won the game. Are there any tricks that can be used here? I am also interested in such a game in which one player loses their queen, but the other one still has theirs.
tactics queens
New contributor
add a comment |
Many years ago, I was on a mountain with some people. I was very young then, between 15 and 17 years old, I think. Some older people came and one of them started to play chess with me.
I cannot recall all the details, but at one moment in the game he captured my queen and I continued to play without it. Besides being without queen, he might have had 1 or 2 of my pawns and a bishop. I also had 1 or 2 his pawns, along with 1 or 2 of his bishops.
Then I started to play very smartly, and, somehow, I manged to capture his queen with a trap made by using rooks and knights. I won the game after that.
Obviously, this is not a question about the particular game I played on the mountain. It is more about, if someone loses his queen at the beginning of the game, what are the tactics to trap and capture the other player's queen?
And also, what is the actual strength of a queen? For example, is it generally better to be without queen or without two knights and a rook but with a queen?
I would like to know more about tactics when some player lost some important pieces, but played so well that he won the game. Are there any tricks that can be used here? I am also interested in such a game in which one player loses their queen, but the other one still has theirs.
tactics queens
New contributor
Many years ago, I was on a mountain with some people. I was very young then, between 15 and 17 years old, I think. Some older people came and one of them started to play chess with me.
I cannot recall all the details, but at one moment in the game he captured my queen and I continued to play without it. Besides being without queen, he might have had 1 or 2 of my pawns and a bishop. I also had 1 or 2 his pawns, along with 1 or 2 of his bishops.
Then I started to play very smartly, and, somehow, I manged to capture his queen with a trap made by using rooks and knights. I won the game after that.
Obviously, this is not a question about the particular game I played on the mountain. It is more about, if someone loses his queen at the beginning of the game, what are the tactics to trap and capture the other player's queen?
And also, what is the actual strength of a queen? For example, is it generally better to be without queen or without two knights and a rook but with a queen?
I would like to know more about tactics when some player lost some important pieces, but played so well that he won the game. Are there any tricks that can be used here? I am also interested in such a game in which one player loses their queen, but the other one still has theirs.
tactics queens
tactics queens
New contributor
New contributor
edited 8 hours ago
Brian Towers♦
19.1k3 gold badges35 silver badges85 bronze badges
19.1k3 gold badges35 silver badges85 bronze badges
New contributor
asked 9 hours ago
GrešnikGrešnik
1161 bronze badge
1161 bronze badge
New contributor
New contributor
add a comment |
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
Unless there is a clear chance for counterplay, losing your queen means losing the game. You won that game because your opponent was a very bad player.
With regards to the strength of the queen, there is no definite answer, as every position is different. However, as a general guideline:
- Two rooks are slightly more powerful than a queen.
- A rook and a minor piece(bishop/knight) is slightly weaker than a queen.
- Two minor pieces vs a queen often means a lost position.
- Three minor pieces are also slightly stronger than a queen
Some folks will come with a "points system", well, that's just plain wrong.
Finally, queens are a very bad piece at blocking enemy advancing pawns, so that may be a source of counterplay in "otherwise worse" positions
Are you sure that there is no, when losing the queen, some extremely good strategy to win over even good average players?
– Grešnik
8 hours ago
2
@David: Why do you think the points system is wrong? After all that's what computers use (and very successfully...).
– user1583209
7 hours ago
@user1583209 I don't think that's a valid argument, as most techniques used by computers are of no value to human players, why should the pointing system be any different? Also, the way computers evaluate positions is way more complicated than just the points. On the other hand, stating "knight and bishop are equal" or "two rooks equal a queen and a pawn" is meaningless outside of its context. As an example, RR+5P vs Q+7P is a very different type of material unbalance than, let's say, RN+5P vs RN+6P. Considering them somewhat equivalent is confusing and of no practical value
– David
4 hours ago
@Grešnik If it's a full queen, with no compensation, not even the strongest supercomputer in the world would beat an average club player. There are some tips for playing those positions (mainly, attack the enemy king and don't trade pieces), but with such big on an unbalance, any decent player can get a win. It's a different story, though, if the queenless player has other material in exchange (like two bishops for instance) when the game can still get complicated
– David
4 hours ago
Fully agree (also see my answer). I was merely objecting to the blunt statement you gave ("wrong ..").
– user1583209
4 hours ago
add a comment |
Losing a queen early on without any compensation or counterplay means almost certain defeat against anybody except for absolute beginners.
There is a certain "point system" which can be used to evaluate a position:
Basically you assign points to certain aspects of the position, like material, piece activity, king safety, space advantage, etc. Adding all those points (with weights depending on the aspects), you come up with a final number, for instance -2. The sign (-) means black is better and the number 2 means that all other things being equal, black could be up by 2 pawns. Of course it could also mean that material is equal and black has much more active pieces, etc.
Just for the material aspect the points assigned to the pieces is usually pawn: 1, knight/bishop: 3, rook: 5, queen: 9 (see this for details) or thereabout.
While this point system is used by computers, for practical play it is not really relevant. I don't know any decent player who would start adding numbers to assess a position.
Still you can use it to answer your question...
Looking at games of top players, within an evaluation of roughly -1 to + 1, i.e. at most a pawn up (all other things being equal), the game usually ends in a draw.
Around +-2, the game would usually be lost/won at GM/IM level, though people might still fight for a while depending on the position.
Around +-3, good players would typically resign immediately.
Of course there are exceptions to this rule and particularly in very tactical/wild positions with open kings and attacking potentials, there could be chances for the losing side.
Still it could give you an idea of what losing a queen (value 9) means...
I would like to know more about tactics when some player lost some important pieces, but played so well that he won the game. Are there any tricks that can be used here? I
The word you mean is "strategy" not "tactics". As outlined above, most people would resign in a situation like you describe. Still, if you think your opponent is weak enough to continue fighting there are a few things you can do to increase your chances:
- keep many pieces on the board (don't exchange pieces): this increases the potential for tactics
- keep the position complicated: typically this means open positions with lots of piece activity
- start a direct attack on the enemy king
- if time is limited try to force your opponent getting low on time, e.g. by moving quickly, doing unusual moves, etc.
- play for tricks/tactics (you really should never do this in chess because it is not how you play chess beyond a certain level...)
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "435"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Grešnik is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fchess.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f24784%2flosing-queen-and-then-winning-the-game%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Unless there is a clear chance for counterplay, losing your queen means losing the game. You won that game because your opponent was a very bad player.
With regards to the strength of the queen, there is no definite answer, as every position is different. However, as a general guideline:
- Two rooks are slightly more powerful than a queen.
- A rook and a minor piece(bishop/knight) is slightly weaker than a queen.
- Two minor pieces vs a queen often means a lost position.
- Three minor pieces are also slightly stronger than a queen
Some folks will come with a "points system", well, that's just plain wrong.
Finally, queens are a very bad piece at blocking enemy advancing pawns, so that may be a source of counterplay in "otherwise worse" positions
Are you sure that there is no, when losing the queen, some extremely good strategy to win over even good average players?
– Grešnik
8 hours ago
2
@David: Why do you think the points system is wrong? After all that's what computers use (and very successfully...).
– user1583209
7 hours ago
@user1583209 I don't think that's a valid argument, as most techniques used by computers are of no value to human players, why should the pointing system be any different? Also, the way computers evaluate positions is way more complicated than just the points. On the other hand, stating "knight and bishop are equal" or "two rooks equal a queen and a pawn" is meaningless outside of its context. As an example, RR+5P vs Q+7P is a very different type of material unbalance than, let's say, RN+5P vs RN+6P. Considering them somewhat equivalent is confusing and of no practical value
– David
4 hours ago
@Grešnik If it's a full queen, with no compensation, not even the strongest supercomputer in the world would beat an average club player. There are some tips for playing those positions (mainly, attack the enemy king and don't trade pieces), but with such big on an unbalance, any decent player can get a win. It's a different story, though, if the queenless player has other material in exchange (like two bishops for instance) when the game can still get complicated
– David
4 hours ago
Fully agree (also see my answer). I was merely objecting to the blunt statement you gave ("wrong ..").
– user1583209
4 hours ago
add a comment |
Unless there is a clear chance for counterplay, losing your queen means losing the game. You won that game because your opponent was a very bad player.
With regards to the strength of the queen, there is no definite answer, as every position is different. However, as a general guideline:
- Two rooks are slightly more powerful than a queen.
- A rook and a minor piece(bishop/knight) is slightly weaker than a queen.
- Two minor pieces vs a queen often means a lost position.
- Three minor pieces are also slightly stronger than a queen
Some folks will come with a "points system", well, that's just plain wrong.
Finally, queens are a very bad piece at blocking enemy advancing pawns, so that may be a source of counterplay in "otherwise worse" positions
Are you sure that there is no, when losing the queen, some extremely good strategy to win over even good average players?
– Grešnik
8 hours ago
2
@David: Why do you think the points system is wrong? After all that's what computers use (and very successfully...).
– user1583209
7 hours ago
@user1583209 I don't think that's a valid argument, as most techniques used by computers are of no value to human players, why should the pointing system be any different? Also, the way computers evaluate positions is way more complicated than just the points. On the other hand, stating "knight and bishop are equal" or "two rooks equal a queen and a pawn" is meaningless outside of its context. As an example, RR+5P vs Q+7P is a very different type of material unbalance than, let's say, RN+5P vs RN+6P. Considering them somewhat equivalent is confusing and of no practical value
– David
4 hours ago
@Grešnik If it's a full queen, with no compensation, not even the strongest supercomputer in the world would beat an average club player. There are some tips for playing those positions (mainly, attack the enemy king and don't trade pieces), but with such big on an unbalance, any decent player can get a win. It's a different story, though, if the queenless player has other material in exchange (like two bishops for instance) when the game can still get complicated
– David
4 hours ago
Fully agree (also see my answer). I was merely objecting to the blunt statement you gave ("wrong ..").
– user1583209
4 hours ago
add a comment |
Unless there is a clear chance for counterplay, losing your queen means losing the game. You won that game because your opponent was a very bad player.
With regards to the strength of the queen, there is no definite answer, as every position is different. However, as a general guideline:
- Two rooks are slightly more powerful than a queen.
- A rook and a minor piece(bishop/knight) is slightly weaker than a queen.
- Two minor pieces vs a queen often means a lost position.
- Three minor pieces are also slightly stronger than a queen
Some folks will come with a "points system", well, that's just plain wrong.
Finally, queens are a very bad piece at blocking enemy advancing pawns, so that may be a source of counterplay in "otherwise worse" positions
Unless there is a clear chance for counterplay, losing your queen means losing the game. You won that game because your opponent was a very bad player.
With regards to the strength of the queen, there is no definite answer, as every position is different. However, as a general guideline:
- Two rooks are slightly more powerful than a queen.
- A rook and a minor piece(bishop/knight) is slightly weaker than a queen.
- Two minor pieces vs a queen often means a lost position.
- Three minor pieces are also slightly stronger than a queen
Some folks will come with a "points system", well, that's just plain wrong.
Finally, queens are a very bad piece at blocking enemy advancing pawns, so that may be a source of counterplay in "otherwise worse" positions
answered 8 hours ago
DavidDavid
1,1928 bronze badges
1,1928 bronze badges
Are you sure that there is no, when losing the queen, some extremely good strategy to win over even good average players?
– Grešnik
8 hours ago
2
@David: Why do you think the points system is wrong? After all that's what computers use (and very successfully...).
– user1583209
7 hours ago
@user1583209 I don't think that's a valid argument, as most techniques used by computers are of no value to human players, why should the pointing system be any different? Also, the way computers evaluate positions is way more complicated than just the points. On the other hand, stating "knight and bishop are equal" or "two rooks equal a queen and a pawn" is meaningless outside of its context. As an example, RR+5P vs Q+7P is a very different type of material unbalance than, let's say, RN+5P vs RN+6P. Considering them somewhat equivalent is confusing and of no practical value
– David
4 hours ago
@Grešnik If it's a full queen, with no compensation, not even the strongest supercomputer in the world would beat an average club player. There are some tips for playing those positions (mainly, attack the enemy king and don't trade pieces), but with such big on an unbalance, any decent player can get a win. It's a different story, though, if the queenless player has other material in exchange (like two bishops for instance) when the game can still get complicated
– David
4 hours ago
Fully agree (also see my answer). I was merely objecting to the blunt statement you gave ("wrong ..").
– user1583209
4 hours ago
add a comment |
Are you sure that there is no, when losing the queen, some extremely good strategy to win over even good average players?
– Grešnik
8 hours ago
2
@David: Why do you think the points system is wrong? After all that's what computers use (and very successfully...).
– user1583209
7 hours ago
@user1583209 I don't think that's a valid argument, as most techniques used by computers are of no value to human players, why should the pointing system be any different? Also, the way computers evaluate positions is way more complicated than just the points. On the other hand, stating "knight and bishop are equal" or "two rooks equal a queen and a pawn" is meaningless outside of its context. As an example, RR+5P vs Q+7P is a very different type of material unbalance than, let's say, RN+5P vs RN+6P. Considering them somewhat equivalent is confusing and of no practical value
– David
4 hours ago
@Grešnik If it's a full queen, with no compensation, not even the strongest supercomputer in the world would beat an average club player. There are some tips for playing those positions (mainly, attack the enemy king and don't trade pieces), but with such big on an unbalance, any decent player can get a win. It's a different story, though, if the queenless player has other material in exchange (like two bishops for instance) when the game can still get complicated
– David
4 hours ago
Fully agree (also see my answer). I was merely objecting to the blunt statement you gave ("wrong ..").
– user1583209
4 hours ago
Are you sure that there is no, when losing the queen, some extremely good strategy to win over even good average players?
– Grešnik
8 hours ago
Are you sure that there is no, when losing the queen, some extremely good strategy to win over even good average players?
– Grešnik
8 hours ago
2
2
@David: Why do you think the points system is wrong? After all that's what computers use (and very successfully...).
– user1583209
7 hours ago
@David: Why do you think the points system is wrong? After all that's what computers use (and very successfully...).
– user1583209
7 hours ago
@user1583209 I don't think that's a valid argument, as most techniques used by computers are of no value to human players, why should the pointing system be any different? Also, the way computers evaluate positions is way more complicated than just the points. On the other hand, stating "knight and bishop are equal" or "two rooks equal a queen and a pawn" is meaningless outside of its context. As an example, RR+5P vs Q+7P is a very different type of material unbalance than, let's say, RN+5P vs RN+6P. Considering them somewhat equivalent is confusing and of no practical value
– David
4 hours ago
@user1583209 I don't think that's a valid argument, as most techniques used by computers are of no value to human players, why should the pointing system be any different? Also, the way computers evaluate positions is way more complicated than just the points. On the other hand, stating "knight and bishop are equal" or "two rooks equal a queen and a pawn" is meaningless outside of its context. As an example, RR+5P vs Q+7P is a very different type of material unbalance than, let's say, RN+5P vs RN+6P. Considering them somewhat equivalent is confusing and of no practical value
– David
4 hours ago
@Grešnik If it's a full queen, with no compensation, not even the strongest supercomputer in the world would beat an average club player. There are some tips for playing those positions (mainly, attack the enemy king and don't trade pieces), but with such big on an unbalance, any decent player can get a win. It's a different story, though, if the queenless player has other material in exchange (like two bishops for instance) when the game can still get complicated
– David
4 hours ago
@Grešnik If it's a full queen, with no compensation, not even the strongest supercomputer in the world would beat an average club player. There are some tips for playing those positions (mainly, attack the enemy king and don't trade pieces), but with such big on an unbalance, any decent player can get a win. It's a different story, though, if the queenless player has other material in exchange (like two bishops for instance) when the game can still get complicated
– David
4 hours ago
Fully agree (also see my answer). I was merely objecting to the blunt statement you gave ("wrong ..").
– user1583209
4 hours ago
Fully agree (also see my answer). I was merely objecting to the blunt statement you gave ("wrong ..").
– user1583209
4 hours ago
add a comment |
Losing a queen early on without any compensation or counterplay means almost certain defeat against anybody except for absolute beginners.
There is a certain "point system" which can be used to evaluate a position:
Basically you assign points to certain aspects of the position, like material, piece activity, king safety, space advantage, etc. Adding all those points (with weights depending on the aspects), you come up with a final number, for instance -2. The sign (-) means black is better and the number 2 means that all other things being equal, black could be up by 2 pawns. Of course it could also mean that material is equal and black has much more active pieces, etc.
Just for the material aspect the points assigned to the pieces is usually pawn: 1, knight/bishop: 3, rook: 5, queen: 9 (see this for details) or thereabout.
While this point system is used by computers, for practical play it is not really relevant. I don't know any decent player who would start adding numbers to assess a position.
Still you can use it to answer your question...
Looking at games of top players, within an evaluation of roughly -1 to + 1, i.e. at most a pawn up (all other things being equal), the game usually ends in a draw.
Around +-2, the game would usually be lost/won at GM/IM level, though people might still fight for a while depending on the position.
Around +-3, good players would typically resign immediately.
Of course there are exceptions to this rule and particularly in very tactical/wild positions with open kings and attacking potentials, there could be chances for the losing side.
Still it could give you an idea of what losing a queen (value 9) means...
I would like to know more about tactics when some player lost some important pieces, but played so well that he won the game. Are there any tricks that can be used here? I
The word you mean is "strategy" not "tactics". As outlined above, most people would resign in a situation like you describe. Still, if you think your opponent is weak enough to continue fighting there are a few things you can do to increase your chances:
- keep many pieces on the board (don't exchange pieces): this increases the potential for tactics
- keep the position complicated: typically this means open positions with lots of piece activity
- start a direct attack on the enemy king
- if time is limited try to force your opponent getting low on time, e.g. by moving quickly, doing unusual moves, etc.
- play for tricks/tactics (you really should never do this in chess because it is not how you play chess beyond a certain level...)
add a comment |
Losing a queen early on without any compensation or counterplay means almost certain defeat against anybody except for absolute beginners.
There is a certain "point system" which can be used to evaluate a position:
Basically you assign points to certain aspects of the position, like material, piece activity, king safety, space advantage, etc. Adding all those points (with weights depending on the aspects), you come up with a final number, for instance -2. The sign (-) means black is better and the number 2 means that all other things being equal, black could be up by 2 pawns. Of course it could also mean that material is equal and black has much more active pieces, etc.
Just for the material aspect the points assigned to the pieces is usually pawn: 1, knight/bishop: 3, rook: 5, queen: 9 (see this for details) or thereabout.
While this point system is used by computers, for practical play it is not really relevant. I don't know any decent player who would start adding numbers to assess a position.
Still you can use it to answer your question...
Looking at games of top players, within an evaluation of roughly -1 to + 1, i.e. at most a pawn up (all other things being equal), the game usually ends in a draw.
Around +-2, the game would usually be lost/won at GM/IM level, though people might still fight for a while depending on the position.
Around +-3, good players would typically resign immediately.
Of course there are exceptions to this rule and particularly in very tactical/wild positions with open kings and attacking potentials, there could be chances for the losing side.
Still it could give you an idea of what losing a queen (value 9) means...
I would like to know more about tactics when some player lost some important pieces, but played so well that he won the game. Are there any tricks that can be used here? I
The word you mean is "strategy" not "tactics". As outlined above, most people would resign in a situation like you describe. Still, if you think your opponent is weak enough to continue fighting there are a few things you can do to increase your chances:
- keep many pieces on the board (don't exchange pieces): this increases the potential for tactics
- keep the position complicated: typically this means open positions with lots of piece activity
- start a direct attack on the enemy king
- if time is limited try to force your opponent getting low on time, e.g. by moving quickly, doing unusual moves, etc.
- play for tricks/tactics (you really should never do this in chess because it is not how you play chess beyond a certain level...)
add a comment |
Losing a queen early on without any compensation or counterplay means almost certain defeat against anybody except for absolute beginners.
There is a certain "point system" which can be used to evaluate a position:
Basically you assign points to certain aspects of the position, like material, piece activity, king safety, space advantage, etc. Adding all those points (with weights depending on the aspects), you come up with a final number, for instance -2. The sign (-) means black is better and the number 2 means that all other things being equal, black could be up by 2 pawns. Of course it could also mean that material is equal and black has much more active pieces, etc.
Just for the material aspect the points assigned to the pieces is usually pawn: 1, knight/bishop: 3, rook: 5, queen: 9 (see this for details) or thereabout.
While this point system is used by computers, for practical play it is not really relevant. I don't know any decent player who would start adding numbers to assess a position.
Still you can use it to answer your question...
Looking at games of top players, within an evaluation of roughly -1 to + 1, i.e. at most a pawn up (all other things being equal), the game usually ends in a draw.
Around +-2, the game would usually be lost/won at GM/IM level, though people might still fight for a while depending on the position.
Around +-3, good players would typically resign immediately.
Of course there are exceptions to this rule and particularly in very tactical/wild positions with open kings and attacking potentials, there could be chances for the losing side.
Still it could give you an idea of what losing a queen (value 9) means...
I would like to know more about tactics when some player lost some important pieces, but played so well that he won the game. Are there any tricks that can be used here? I
The word you mean is "strategy" not "tactics". As outlined above, most people would resign in a situation like you describe. Still, if you think your opponent is weak enough to continue fighting there are a few things you can do to increase your chances:
- keep many pieces on the board (don't exchange pieces): this increases the potential for tactics
- keep the position complicated: typically this means open positions with lots of piece activity
- start a direct attack on the enemy king
- if time is limited try to force your opponent getting low on time, e.g. by moving quickly, doing unusual moves, etc.
- play for tricks/tactics (you really should never do this in chess because it is not how you play chess beyond a certain level...)
Losing a queen early on without any compensation or counterplay means almost certain defeat against anybody except for absolute beginners.
There is a certain "point system" which can be used to evaluate a position:
Basically you assign points to certain aspects of the position, like material, piece activity, king safety, space advantage, etc. Adding all those points (with weights depending on the aspects), you come up with a final number, for instance -2. The sign (-) means black is better and the number 2 means that all other things being equal, black could be up by 2 pawns. Of course it could also mean that material is equal and black has much more active pieces, etc.
Just for the material aspect the points assigned to the pieces is usually pawn: 1, knight/bishop: 3, rook: 5, queen: 9 (see this for details) or thereabout.
While this point system is used by computers, for practical play it is not really relevant. I don't know any decent player who would start adding numbers to assess a position.
Still you can use it to answer your question...
Looking at games of top players, within an evaluation of roughly -1 to + 1, i.e. at most a pawn up (all other things being equal), the game usually ends in a draw.
Around +-2, the game would usually be lost/won at GM/IM level, though people might still fight for a while depending on the position.
Around +-3, good players would typically resign immediately.
Of course there are exceptions to this rule and particularly in very tactical/wild positions with open kings and attacking potentials, there could be chances for the losing side.
Still it could give you an idea of what losing a queen (value 9) means...
I would like to know more about tactics when some player lost some important pieces, but played so well that he won the game. Are there any tricks that can be used here? I
The word you mean is "strategy" not "tactics". As outlined above, most people would resign in a situation like you describe. Still, if you think your opponent is weak enough to continue fighting there are a few things you can do to increase your chances:
- keep many pieces on the board (don't exchange pieces): this increases the potential for tactics
- keep the position complicated: typically this means open positions with lots of piece activity
- start a direct attack on the enemy king
- if time is limited try to force your opponent getting low on time, e.g. by moving quickly, doing unusual moves, etc.
- play for tricks/tactics (you really should never do this in chess because it is not how you play chess beyond a certain level...)
answered 7 hours ago
user1583209user1583209
12.7k2 gold badges20 silver badges61 bronze badges
12.7k2 gold badges20 silver badges61 bronze badges
add a comment |
add a comment |
Grešnik is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Grešnik is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Grešnik is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Grešnik is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Chess Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fchess.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f24784%2flosing-queen-and-then-winning-the-game%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown