why can't people take a beating?

Originally posted by huckleberryhound
I don't mean to be rude, but i thought i was ahead from 11- ... Bg5xc1, until the end of the game. . .i was on the back foot sometimes, but always ahead.

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
Before white erred with 10.Qf4??, he had a technically won game, up a pawn with no compensation for Black. Black should not have dropped the g-pawn in the opening, particularly when ...Ne7 could have been played instead of ...Be7 in response to White's check.

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
Before white erred with 10.Qf4??, he had a technically won game, up a pawn with no compensation for Black. Black should not have dropped the g-pawn in the opening, particularly when ...Ne7 could have been played instead of ...Be7 in response to White's check.

Originally posted by cmsMaster
That was a horrible looking game, although some of mine are pretty awful too. I think it's time that I spend more time on moves so that my games don't end up looking like that...

Originally posted by huckleberryhound
Thats exactly what i said, after move 11, i was ahead for the rest of the game.


A win is a win.

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
You left out the part about White having a won position until move 10, though.

Originally posted by huckleberryhound
and your point is?

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
My point is that I believe White should have played on, given that both players enjoyed winning positions earlier on, yet both squandered them.

Edit: There was also a moment in the game where Black almost trapped his own Bishop by playing ...Bh3. That sort of thing can only encourage White to play on. Black is not maintaining a calm control of the position, but rather taking needless risks.

i like to take the beatings of higher rated players then go back to playing players around my level again to see how i improved and when i get a lot better i like to go back to the people who beat me and beat the crap out of them.

Originally posted by huckleberryhound
believe me, black was in fine form mate.


you're just trying to be an ass

I played IM Robert (Bob) Wade in the Zimbabwe Open Championship about 20 years ago and got a better game 2B & Ps vs 2N & Ps with my Bs both being "good" bishops.

I lost due to his exceptionally good Knight play. Afterwards he congratulated me, gave me some books he had edited and was kind enough to sign them. He also sat down with me and showed me where I went wrong and how I could have beaten him.

He did this regardless of whether he won or lost and regardless of the strength of his opponent. A true gentleman!

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
You're getting hot under the collar, and your objectivity is flying right out the window.

For example, you missed 9...Bh4, winning White's Queen outright.

Then you follow that up with 10...Bg5???, which just hangs the Bishop to 11.Qxg5.

(Edit: Although, to your credit, you seem to have remarkable powers of hypnosis; White refused to take it!) ...[text shortened]... to give away major material by making careless moves.

Is this what you call 'fine form'?

Originally posted by huckleberryhound
all this before move 11.


so how many games have you played in the past two months ?

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
I don't understand this fixation with move 11. It's almost as if, from that point on, you fancied yourself a different player, no longer capable of making mistakes.

Originally posted by huckleberryhound
go away troll