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?

Most elegant way to write a one shot IF

If two black hole event horizons overlap (touch) can they ever separate again?

What's the rule for a natural 20 on a Perception check?

I'm reinstalling my Linux desktop, how do I keep SSH logins working?

Single level file directory

In native German words, is Q always followed by U, as in English?

Most important new papers in computational complexity

Golf the smallest circle!

Chords behaving as a melody

Does a return economy-class seat between London and San Francisco release 5.28 t of CO2e?

How can I deal with extreme temperatures in a hotel room?

How is this practical and very old scene shot?

Handling a player (unintentionally) stealing the spotlight

Is the location of an aircraft spoiler really that vital?

How can my story take place on Earth without referring to our existing cities and countries?

Who are these Discworld wizards from this picture?

Was it really unprofessional of me to leave without asking for a raise first?

Donkey as Democratic Party symbolic animal

Should I report a leak of confidential HR information?

Lifting a probability measure to the power set

What could a reptilian race tell by candling their eggs?

Do launching rockets produce a sonic boom?

Step into the Octagram

Symbol for "not absolutely continuous" in Latex



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 8 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
            7 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
              7 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
              7 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
              7 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
              7 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
            7 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
            7 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 6 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

                    Invision Community Contents History See also References External links Navigation menuProprietaryinvisioncommunity.comIPS Community ForumsIPS Community Forumsthis blog entry"License Changes, IP.Board 3.4, and the Future""Interview -- Matt Mecham of Ibforums""CEO Invision Power Board, Matt Mecham Is a Liar, Thief!"IPB License Explanation 1.3, 1.3.1, 2.0, and 2.1ArchivedSecurity Fixes, Updates And Enhancements For IPB 1.3.1Archived"New Demo Accounts - Invision Power Services"the original"New Default Skin"the original"Invision Power Board 3.0.0 and Applications Released"the original"Archived copy"the original"Perpetual licenses being done away with""Release Notes - Invision Power Services""Introducing: IPS Community Suite 4!"Invision Community Release Notes

                    Canceling a color specificationRandomly assigning color to Graphics3D objects?Default color for Filling in Mathematica 9Coloring specific elements of sets with a prime modified order in an array plotHow to pick a color differing significantly from the colors already in a given color list?Detection of the text colorColor numbers based on their valueCan color schemes for use with ColorData include opacity specification?My dynamic color schemes

                    Ласкавець круглолистий Зміст Опис | Поширення | Галерея | Примітки | Посилання | Навігаційне меню58171138361-22960890446Bupleurum rotundifoliumEuro+Med PlantbasePlants of the World Online — Kew ScienceGermplasm Resources Information Network (GRIN)Ласкавецькн. VI : Літери Ком — Левиправивши або дописавши її