How do you feel when you get a win you don't deserve

I just played this game:

I start off in a really strong position after black moves his queen 5 times in the first 8 moves. But then until about move 24 we play a really close interesting game, for beginners. But after this point I make a couple of blunders and by move 29 I'm pretty much resigned to loosing and just playing out the game, I almost always play my games to checkmate. But black blunders on move 30 and I start to play for a draw. Black's clearly having trouble figuring out what to do after this point, I had a lot less time but it became almost even after a few moves. But finally on move 38 black blunders again and I win. It just feel so hollow though to win a game where I was clearly beaten twice. How do you feel after wining a game only because the other player messes up at the end? It’s the getting an Ace on the River of Chess.

@OP: An oft-cited chess philosophy states that the winner of the game is the player to make the second-to-last mistake. Nothing you described above would lead anyone to believe that you don't deserve the win. Your opponent blundered more meaningfully, and so you won. That's what matters. Yes, you made some mistakes as well, but your opponent couldn't win as a result of your errors.

Horny.

TERRIBLE !  and then i dance around the room singing .

regret and relief

I feel great.

I'll second what whirwind said. The problem with your premise is the following question, who does deserve to win that game? Do you think your opponent deserves to win? After making several important blunders?

Turn the question around: how do you feel when you lose a game you didn't deserve to lose, since you played so great up until some fatal blunder? I kind of figure if I screwed up, the other guy won fair and square. So why shouldn't I deserve the win when the other guy screws up?

Well put.

Everyone makes mistakes.

I think it was in Dan Heismans "Novice Nook" series on Chess Cafe (highly recommended!) that I read some statistics that showed every game under say 1800-2000 will have numerous mistakes, its just down to who makes the most fatal one.

Although, according to my recent opponents (6 in a row now 1600 rated, different server) I didn't deserve any of my wins, them being completely immune to mistakes of any kind, their losing moves being "mouseslips" and I've been bombarded with takeback requests and draw spamming. Apparently I'm the only 1600 player that makes any mistakes.....

Its a bit disheartening to have tried hard but for your opp to try cheapen your win through such bad-sportsmanship.

Well we're just playing a game, so I feel either lucky, or I just want to play another game and do better. If I was black in that game, I'd probably feel embarrassed in a funny way

I won a 15 min game on time the other day in a clearly lost position.  I didn't feel good about it especially since I play this guy alot.  But there was no time to extend a draw offer in the time scramble.  If he had offered a draw I definitely would have accepted.

What if your opponent makes two mistakes, and you make none?

 Or, what if your opponent makes the last two (or more) consecutive mistakes?

It is merely an adage, not to be taken literally. The idea is, simply, that the last mistake is the game-losing one.

And, actually, even that isn't necessarily true. One player could surrender forced mate, and his opponent could commit a small inaccuracy en route to that mate. In this case, the player making the second-to-last mistake actually loses the game.

A win is always deserved, there is no luck in chess, your opponent may have got a winning postin and not won it that is not your problem.  Your opponent deserves the loss for not winning a won position

I spin around three times, then prostrate myself and say nineteen hail marys.

Sure there is. "Luck" is merely something positive that occurred. It's more of an expression of modesty, because the person who received "luck" doesn't feel they did anything special to deserve it.

If you analyze your good games with a strong program, you will find you made many blunders you were never aware of before, so in other words the only difference between your wins and losses is that your opponent couldnt capitilize on those mistakes. In other words your objective in chess is to avoid losing your game until your opponent loses his...you avoided losing, so you won.

I know the only undeserved win is against someone who intentionally loses. However, I hate it when I analyze one of my "winning" tactics just to see that the opposing side could have made it out. On the other hand, a game full of forced moves is no fun either. I suppose, by not being very good, I have to deal with empty feeling wins.

its luck! that's why, we say, good luck, before we play a game:)

how do you feel if you "win" and you know that you did so because you have more experience than your opponent?

or, if you "win" and your oponent have a disability, meaning he/she aint as bright as  you?

its all relative.

if we all share the same rating, all games should end in a draw, because that is what it mean.

the only time we would win, is when the opponent lost concentration and blundered.

you got lucky!

so your rating would increase by the amount of "luck"

you did not learn anything, except that you did something your opponent did not do, its not that you concentrated more, it is simply because his wife walked into the room with some snacks, and that his wife loves him more than what yours do:D

so who is the real winner?