Would you have played for the win?

After Bxd1, I played Rh3 instead of Rxd1 because I thought time was of the essence, since the key to winning would be to get my other pieces involved in the attack before my opponent could bring in their pieces to defend, and I missed Bg4. While I felt I might still have a win, I knew I could at least force a draw. Considering I was down a rook and bishop for three pawns, I knew was pretty sure if I didn't force a draw, any mistake meant I'd almost certainly lose.

In the end, I chose to force a draw.

In this situation, would you have played for the win?

there is a sneaky move K e4 maybe it can help to get to the king for queen support, so maybe yes , I would play, of I noticed that.
Also You sac a Bishop after Bxd1, not Rh3

I agree with what Mr Machine says.

@Erlkonig1989 said in #1:
>
> In this situation, would you have played for the win?

Probably yes, just because after Rg3 there is no possible check from Black, so in any case it seems you have still the possibility of force a draw.

Only if I had noticed some moves ahead which could make me confirm about my advantage. If I don't see any sequence of moves, then I would too most likely draw.

PS: See this game of mine.


I had winning position (forced mate) towards the end but didn't see the line and was forced to draw with threefold repetition. An old game whose lesson I have pretty much learnt!

@Akbar2thegreat : this is so nice, final mate sequence includes placing your King just behind your Queen, in front of an opponent's Rook well protected. No wonder you wouldn't see it!