I feel like people focus too much on winning, which is understandable considering that's what you're trying to achieve when you play chess, but I hardly ever get or see tips on how to draw a position, or convert a losing position to winning. Why is that? What are some things one should focus on when playing lost and potentially drawn positions? How should one go about this? I feel as if this skill of playing through losing positions is underrated and I would like to get better at it, It seems like a valuable skill to learn.
Because drawing is not an active thing; it's the result of the other guy not winning. There are winning plans, and then if nobody can complete one the result is a draw. There aren't drawing plans, there's stuff like fortresses and perpetual check but those are special resources; you can't play your games with the goal of having a fortress in the endgame. If you play games aiming for a draw, you're gonna lose some and draw some, but you're not gonna win any; not against strong opponents anyway.
There's times when in endgames you know you're losing, and then you focus on stopping the other guy's winning plan instead of trying to win yourself (because you know it's not gonna work). That's a realistic example of playing for a draw, but it's really about knowing endgames. There's other reasons to draw, for example trying to become a submarine in a tournament, or needing to go to the toilet urgently and offering a draw in a wining position, but these are meta stuff.
Play to win or the other guy is gonna steamroll you.
There's times when in endgames you know you're losing, and then you focus on stopping the other guy's winning plan instead of trying to win yourself (because you know it's not gonna work). That's a realistic example of playing for a draw, but it's really about knowing endgames. There's other reasons to draw, for example trying to become a submarine in a tournament, or needing to go to the toilet urgently and offering a draw in a wining position, but these are meta stuff.
Play to win or the other guy is gonna steamroll you.
There are some openings/setups that gear towards a draw more than others. At a high level, strategically forcing a draw may be advantageous for a better overall result. For example, Kramnik used the Berlin Defense to draw players as black so that he would have a better overall score when he played with white in the World Championship against Kasparov.
In some cases, playing for a draw is better than losing, and may be the only outcome of a game. There are many ways of doing this, perpetual checks, or a shameless sacrifice perpetual like this one:
If you are playing a higher rated player, and you see a guaranteed draw with no guarantee of winning, always take it. You will always gain rating.
In some cases, playing for a draw is better than losing, and may be the only outcome of a game. There are many ways of doing this, perpetual checks, or a shameless sacrifice perpetual like this one:
If you are playing a higher rated player, and you see a guaranteed draw with no guarantee of winning, always take it. You will always gain rating.
@JuicyChickenNO1 said in #2:
> [...]
> Play to win or the other guy is gonna steamroll you.
There's some truth in this, but I'd prefer to write: "Play actively or the other guy is gonna steamroll you."
Playing for a draw is a legitimate strategy. But the mistake many players make when doing this is to exchange pieces heading for a quick endgame but to do this at the cost of letting their opponent control an open file, or ending up defending weak pawns without any counterattack. This is a recipe for losing.
@Genesisystem One of the best ways to play for a draw is to exchange the right minor pieces so that opposite coloured bishops remain, i.e. one player has a dark-squared bishop and the other a light-squared one, and head for the endgame with those bishops. But stay active when doing it and be careful because if your opponent whips up a middlegame attack on your king with opposite coloured bishops on the board that attack is usually winning.
However you do it, playing for a draw is easier said than done. It requires great care.
> [...]
> Play to win or the other guy is gonna steamroll you.
There's some truth in this, but I'd prefer to write: "Play actively or the other guy is gonna steamroll you."
Playing for a draw is a legitimate strategy. But the mistake many players make when doing this is to exchange pieces heading for a quick endgame but to do this at the cost of letting their opponent control an open file, or ending up defending weak pawns without any counterattack. This is a recipe for losing.
@Genesisystem One of the best ways to play for a draw is to exchange the right minor pieces so that opposite coloured bishops remain, i.e. one player has a dark-squared bishop and the other a light-squared one, and head for the endgame with those bishops. But stay active when doing it and be careful because if your opponent whips up a middlegame attack on your king with opposite coloured bishops on the board that attack is usually winning.
However you do it, playing for a draw is easier said than done. It requires great care.