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;








3















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.










share|improve this question









New contributor



Grešnik is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

























    3















    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.










    share|improve this question









    New contributor



    Grešnik is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.





















      3












      3








      3








      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.










      share|improve this question









      New contributor



      Grešnik is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.











      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






      share|improve this question









      New contributor



      Grešnik is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.










      share|improve this question









      New contributor



      Grešnik is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.








      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited 8 hours ago









      Brian Towers

      19.1k3 gold badges35 silver badges85 bronze badges




      19.1k3 gold badges35 silver badges85 bronze badges






      New contributor



      Grešnik is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.








      asked 9 hours ago









      GrešnikGrešnik

      1161 bronze badge




      1161 bronze badge




      New contributor



      Grešnik is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.




      New contributor




      Grešnik is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.






















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          3














          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






          share|improve this answer























          • 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


















          3














          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...)





          share|improve this answer

























            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.









            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            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









            3














            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






            share|improve this answer























            • 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















            3














            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






            share|improve this answer























            • 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













            3












            3








            3







            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






            share|improve this answer













            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







            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            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

















            • 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













            3














            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...)





            share|improve this answer



























              3














              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...)





              share|improve this answer

























                3












                3








                3







                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...)





                share|improve this answer













                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...)






                share|improve this answer












                share|improve this answer



                share|improve this answer










                answered 7 hours ago









                user1583209user1583209

                12.7k2 gold badges20 silver badges61 bronze badges




                12.7k2 gold badges20 silver badges61 bronze badges




















                    Grešnik is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









                    draft saved

                    draft discarded


















                    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.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    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





















































                    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







                    Popular posts from this blog

                    19. јануар Садржај Догађаји Рођења Смрти Празници и дани сећања Види још Референце Мени за навигацијуу

                    Israel Cuprins Etimologie | Istorie | Geografie | Politică | Demografie | Educație | Economie | Cultură | Note explicative | Note bibliografice | Bibliografie | Legături externe | Meniu de navigaresite web oficialfacebooktweeterGoogle+Instagramcanal YouTubeInstagramtextmodificaremodificarewww.technion.ac.ilnew.huji.ac.ilwww.weizmann.ac.ilwww1.biu.ac.ilenglish.tau.ac.ilwww.haifa.ac.ilin.bgu.ac.ilwww.openu.ac.ilwww.ariel.ac.ilCIA FactbookHarta Israelului"Negotiating Jerusalem," Palestine–Israel JournalThe Schizoid Nature of Modern Hebrew: A Slavic Language in Search of a Semitic Past„Arabic in Israel: an official language and a cultural bridge”„Latest Population Statistics for Israel”„Israel Population”„Tables”„Report for Selected Countries and Subjects”Human Development Report 2016: Human Development for Everyone„Distribution of family income - Gini index”The World FactbookJerusalem Law„Israel”„Israel”„Zionist Leaders: David Ben-Gurion 1886–1973”„The status of Jerusalem”„Analysis: Kadima's big plans”„Israel's Hard-Learned Lessons”„The Legacy of Undefined Borders, Tel Aviv Notes No. 40, 5 iunie 2002”„Israel Journal: A Land Without Borders”„Population”„Israel closes decade with population of 7.5 million”Time Series-DataBank„Selected Statistics on Jerusalem Day 2007 (Hebrew)”Golan belongs to Syria, Druze protestGlobal Survey 2006: Middle East Progress Amid Global Gains in FreedomWHO: Life expectancy in Israel among highest in the worldInternational Monetary Fund, World Economic Outlook Database, April 2011: Nominal GDP list of countries. Data for the year 2010.„Israel's accession to the OECD”Popular Opinion„On the Move”Hosea 12:5„Walking the Bible Timeline”„Palestine: History”„Return to Zion”An invention called 'the Jewish people' – Haaretz – Israel NewsoriginalJewish and Non-Jewish Population of Palestine-Israel (1517–2004)ImmigrationJewishvirtuallibrary.orgChapter One: The Heralders of Zionism„The birth of modern Israel: A scrap of paper that changed history”„League of Nations: The Mandate for Palestine, 24 iulie 1922”The Population of Palestine Prior to 1948originalBackground Paper No. 47 (ST/DPI/SER.A/47)History: Foreign DominationTwo Hundred and Seventh Plenary Meeting„Israel (Labor Zionism)”Population, by Religion and Population GroupThe Suez CrisisAdolf EichmannJustice Ministry Reply to Amnesty International Report„The Interregnum”Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs – The Palestinian National Covenant- July 1968Research on terrorism: trends, achievements & failuresThe Routledge Atlas of the Arab–Israeli conflict: The Complete History of the Struggle and the Efforts to Resolve It"George Habash, Palestinian Terrorism Tactician, Dies at 82."„1973: Arab states attack Israeli forces”Agranat Commission„Has Israel Annexed East Jerusalem?”original„After 4 Years, Intifada Still Smolders”From the End of the Cold War to 2001originalThe Oslo Accords, 1993Israel-PLO Recognition – Exchange of Letters between PM Rabin and Chairman Arafat – Sept 9- 1993Foundation for Middle East PeaceSources of Population Growth: Total Israeli Population and Settler Population, 1991–2003original„Israel marks Rabin assassination”The Wye River Memorandumoriginal„West Bank barrier route disputed, Israeli missile kills 2”"Permanent Ceasefire to Be Based on Creation Of Buffer Zone Free of Armed Personnel Other than UN, Lebanese Forces"„Hezbollah kills 8 soldiers, kidnaps two in offensive on northern border”„Olmert confirms peace talks with Syria”„Battleground Gaza: Israeli ground forces invade the strip”„IDF begins Gaza troop withdrawal, hours after ending 3-week offensive”„THE LAND: Geography and Climate”„Area of districts, sub-districts, natural regions and lakes”„Israel - Geography”„Makhteshim Country”Israel and the Palestinian Territories„Makhtesh Ramon”„The Living Dead Sea”„Temperatures reach record high in Pakistan”„Climate Extremes In Israel”Israel in figures„Deuteronom”„JNF: 240 million trees planted since 1901”„Vegetation of Israel and Neighboring Countries”Environmental Law in Israel„Executive branch”„Israel's election process explained”„The Electoral System in Israel”„Constitution for Israel”„All 120 incoming Knesset members”„Statul ISRAEL”„The Judiciary: The Court System”„Israel's high court unique in region”„Israel and the International Criminal Court: A Legal Battlefield”„Localities and population, by population group, district, sub-district and natural region”„Israel: Districts, Major Cities, Urban Localities & Metropolitan Areas”„Israel-Egypt Relations: Background & Overview of Peace Treaty”„Solana to Haaretz: New Rules of War Needed for Age of Terror”„Israel's Announcement Regarding Settlements”„United Nations Security Council Resolution 497”„Security Council resolution 478 (1980) on the status of Jerusalem”„Arabs will ask U.N. to seek razing of Israeli wall”„Olmert: Willing to trade land for peace”„Mapping Peace between Syria and Israel”„Egypt: Israel must accept the land-for-peace formula”„Israel: Age structure from 2005 to 2015”„Global, regional, and national disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) for 306 diseases and injuries and healthy life expectancy (HALE) for 188 countries, 1990–2013: quantifying the epidemiological transition”10.1016/S0140-6736(15)61340-X„World Health Statistics 2014”„Life expectancy for Israeli men world's 4th highest”„Family Structure and Well-Being Across Israel's Diverse Population”„Fertility among Jewish and Muslim Women in Israel, by Level of Religiosity, 1979-2009”„Israel leaders in birth rate, but poverty major challenge”„Ethnic Groups”„Israel's population: Over 8.5 million”„Israel - Ethnic groups”„Jews, by country of origin and age”„Minority Communities in Israel: Background & Overview”„Israel”„Language in Israel”„Selected Data from the 2011 Social Survey on Mastery of the Hebrew Language and Usage of Languages”„Religions”„5 facts about Israeli Druze, a unique religious and ethnic group”„Israël”Israel Country Study Guide„Haredi city in Negev – blessing or curse?”„New town Harish harbors hopes of being more than another Pleasantville”„List of localities, in alphabetical order”„Muncitorii români, doriți în Israel”„Prietenia româno-israeliană la nevoie se cunoaște”„The Higher Education System in Israel”„Middle East”„Academic Ranking of World Universities 2016”„Israel”„Israel”„Jewish Nobel Prize Winners”„All Nobel Prizes in Literature”„All Nobel Peace Prizes”„All Prizes in Economic Sciences”„All Nobel Prizes in Chemistry”„List of Fields Medallists”„Sakharov Prize”„Țara care și-a sfidat "destinul" și se bate umăr la umăr cu Silicon Valley”„Apple's R&D center in Israel grew to about 800 employees”„Tim Cook: Apple's Herzliya R&D center second-largest in world”„Lecții de economie de la Israel”„Land use”Israel Investment and Business GuideA Country Study: IsraelCentral Bureau of StatisticsFlorin Diaconu, „Kadima: Flexibilitate și pragmatism, dar nici un compromis în chestiuni vitale", în Revista Institutului Diplomatic Român, anul I, numărul I, semestrul I, 2006, pp. 71-72Florin Diaconu, „Likud: Dreapta israeliană constant opusă retrocedării teritoriilor cureite prin luptă în 1967", în Revista Institutului Diplomatic Român, anul I, numărul I, semestrul I, 2006, pp. 73-74MassadaIsraelul a crescut in 50 de ani cât alte state intr-un mileniuIsrael Government PortalIsraelIsraelIsraelmmmmmXX451232cb118646298(data)4027808-634110000 0004 0372 0767n7900328503691455-bb46-37e3-91d2-cb064a35ffcc1003570400564274ge1294033523775214929302638955X146498911146498911

                    Кастелфранко ди Сопра Становништво Референце Спољашње везе Мени за навигацију43°37′18″ СГШ; 11°33′32″ ИГД / 43.62156° СГШ; 11.55885° ИГД / 43.62156; 11.5588543°37′18″ СГШ; 11°33′32″ ИГД / 43.62156° СГШ; 11.55885° ИГД / 43.62156; 11.558853179688„The GeoNames geographical database”„Istituto Nazionale di Statistica”проширитиууWorldCat156923403n850174324558639-1cb14643287r(подаци)