21 Oct 09
1 edit
Originally posted by Fat LadyHmm... but it takes a while to convert it to a point against a stubborn White player (which White in this case obviously was 😛). But if White had an extra Rook "somewhere on the board" (a5?), you would agree Nf4 is the better move, right?
No way! Swapping off the rooks and leaving White with no pieces whatsoever against two has got to be better.
What I wanted to say is that Rxg2+ is the show-off move (look what I can do!), Nf4 is better. OK in this example even 30. ... Nc7 can be called the better move, so this is a debatable statement, I know. 😕
21 Oct 09
Originally posted by heinzkatIn my experience people resign when they can't see any conceivable way that they can avoid losing. For example, someone might be a queen down against you, but they won't resign until you play h3, removing any chance of a backrank mate.
Hmm... but it takes a while to convert it to a point against a stubborn White player (which White in this case obviously was 😛). But if White had an extra Rook "somewhere on the board" (a5?), you would agree Nf4 is the better move, right?
What I wanted to say is that Rxg2+ is the show-off move (look what I can do!), Nf4 is better. OK in this example even 30. ... Nc7 can be called the better move, so this is a debatable statement, I know. 😕
In this game White probably still had hopes of picking up stray pawns and maybe getting a lucky skewer with his big, bad rook. I think he would have resigned once that was off the board.
One of the chess booklets I've written for beginners is about simplifying in won positions. It gives examples where the winning side gives up the exchange to achieve a winning ending, or swaps off a queen and knight for his opponents queen because he still has another extra piece in reserve!
21 Oct 09
Originally posted by Fat LadyYes I expected 13.Qe3!
When I went through the game I assumed that you had played 29. ... Nd5 because you'd seen 30. ... Rxg2+! (31. Kxg2 Nf4+ gets the rook back), but then you didn't play it!
I think White could have got his piece back early on by playing 13.Qe3! with the thread of 14.f3
Still like my position though, but it's far from won.
22. Qe7 would also not give away another piece,..
Then again, 22...Qxe7 would also seal the deal
To be honest after 27.f3 I got lazy and moved without calculating deeply.
21 Oct 09
Originally posted by Fat LadyBut 30. ... Rxg2+?? 31. Kf1 and the game is on
In my experience people resign when they can't see any conceivable way that they can avoid losing. For example, someone might be a queen down against you, but they won't resign until you play h3, removing any chance of a backrank mate.
In this game White probably still had hopes of picking up stray pawns and maybe getting a lucky skewer with his big, bad ...[text shortened]... queen and knight for his opponents queen because he still has another extra piece in reserve!
OK, forget it, both moves have their merits 😕
21 Oct 09
Originally posted by Fat LadyI agree, stopping all counterplay is the best.
In my experience people resign when they can't see any conceivable way that they can avoid losing. For example, someone might be a queen down against you, but they won't resign until you play h3, removing any chance of a backrank mate.
In this game White probably still had hopes of picking up stray pawns and maybe getting a lucky skewer with his big, bad ...[text shortened]... queen and knight for his opponents queen because he still has another extra piece in reserve!
Will keep calculating deeply next time to avoid this slapping 🙂
Despite his 1569 rating, my opponent drew against a 2030, 1802 and won all his other games so far this season.
I think this also contributed in him playing on.
21 Oct 09
1 edit
Originally posted by heinzkatAnd after 31. Kf1 Rc2 Black picks up White's passed pawn. Again, whilst the losing player still has a passed pawn he can imagine it suddenly rushing up the board and queening. Give your opponent every reason to resign!
But 30. ... Rxg2+?? 31. Kf1 and the game is on
OK, forget it, both moves have their merits 😕
26 Oct 09
2 edits
I found an old scorebook of mine yesterday. This game is from 18 years ago and is typical of my style back then - horrible opening play and then a sneaky trick that would make Greenpawn blush. The sad thing is, my tactical and positional play are far better now but my results are no better.
Mind you the scorebook also contained the score of a game which I thought had been thrown away years ago - a win against Chris Cooley, graded 214 and one of the top 20 players in Britain at the time.
27 Oct 09
This was bound to happen. 🙁
Played against a 2030 player and received a total trashing.
The main problem seems to be my development. (Knight stays on b8). Tips on handling this game are more then welcome.
The reason I kept playing beyond move 26 was because he just had a few minutes left on his clock, when he speeded up. I resigned.
About the moves:
I'm not sure about 6...Bb4+ 6...Bd6 seems better
What do you think about 10...dxc4?
11...Nxc3 is a move that should not be considered
I missed 19.Re3!
27 Oct 09
Originally posted by HabeascorpI can't remember a thing about the game, but I'm sure I only played 12. ... h6 to chase away the knight from an aggressive looking square. I would have found the 14. ... Qc7 trick only after 13. Bf3?? and I wouldn't have bothered looking too hard at possible replies for White as it's pretty clear that Black will be a piece up and the worst that could happen is that White will get a pawn for it.
you must have seen qc7 at the time. I am curious as to the amount of analysis you can remember from so long ago. when you went through the game did you instantly recall that was your winning move. Do you recall looking at response to h4 etc?
16. ... Ne4 is more difficult to figure out. It's possible that I had simply missed 17. Qf3 or perhaps intended 17. ... Nd6 or 17. ... Qc7 to break the pin. However I may well have seen the 17. ... Nxc3 18. Qxb7 Ne2# trick when I played the knight to e4 as I did tend to play unsound tactics a lot more in those days.
28 Oct 09
Originally posted by woodwormin another thread you started playing chess 4½ years ago - how come you're able to present a 10 year old game in this thread?
This one is an OTB chess league game, ten years ago:
[pgn]
[Event "Liga"]
[Date "1999"]
[White "woodworm"]
[Black "Schaper"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "B21"]
1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 Nc6 5.Nf3 d6
6.Bc4 h6 7.O-O Nf6 8.Qe2 Bg4 9.Bb3 Nd4 10.Ba4+ Nd7 11.Qd3 Nxf3+ 12.gxf3
Bh5 13.e5 e6 14.exd6 a6 15.Bf4 Qf6 16.Qe3 g5 17.Nd5 Qf5 18.Bxd7+ Kxd7 19. ...[text shortened]... ere was some better moves for me, I took those variants who was easier to calculate.