@fmdavidhlevin saidLooks like the queen sac was the only way out.
On the flip side, White had a substantial lead in development that in a few moves translated to a strong attack. In fact, after 20.Ne4 (threatening 21.Bxd5 Qxd5 22.Nf6+), I'm not sure that Black had a fully satisfactory defense.
So I did the right thing.
Fortunately the enemy walked himself into a mate. 😀
@fmdavidhlevin saidWhite missed that the Queen can be trapped in the Englund. Nd5 then Nc4 and white threatens Ra1.
On the flip side, White had a substantial lead in development that in a few moves translated to a strong attack. In fact, after 20.Ne4 (threatening 21.Bxd5 Qxd5 22.Nf6+), I'm not sure that Black had a fully satisfactory defense.
White also missed the attack you pointed out due to the hole at f6.
@congruent saidI don't understand what you mean here. Can you be more clear? Preferably give the pgn.
White missed that the Queen can be trapped in the Englund. Nd5 then Nc4 and white threatens Ra1.
White also missed the attack you pointed out due to the hole at f6.
@carnivorum saidDid you see the Youtube channel link I gave on how to ensure White gets a good game versus the Englund gambit?
I don't understand what you mean here. Can you be more clear? Preferably give the pgn.
Maybe GreenPawn or someone can tell me how to draw arrows but this is at move 10 Nc4 with the idea of trapping the black Queen.
This is the Youtube guy beating a 2450 player, the 2450 player leaves his King in the centre while pursuing the h5 attacks of the Englund gambit, someone said on here they don't care about the centre 🙂
@congruent saidI didn't see that link, but I know that when somebody knows the refutation of the Englund, black is in trouble.
Did you see the Youtube channel link I gave on how to ensure White gets a good game versus the Englund gambit?
[fen]r1b1k1nr/pppp1ppp/8/1n1NP3/2N5/8/PqP1PPPP/2RQKB1R b Kkq - 4 10[/fen]
Maybe GreenPawn or someone can tell me how to draw arrows but this is at move 10 Nc4 with the idea of trapping the black Queen.
This is the Youtube guy beating a 2450 player, the 245 ...[text shortened]... Qg6 22. h3 Bxf4 23. Qxf4 Ne5 24. Rxe5 dxe5 25. Qxe5 Qh6 26. Qd4+ Kc7 27. Rf7+ Kb8 28. Qe5+ 1-0[/pgn]
But like I said; I play the Englund often, and I can't remember when I got the correct refutation played against me.
But I do know a lot of quick wins. 😀
And the guy playing the Englund and losing, he didn't lose because of the Englund gambit.
It can surely happen that you lose because you played the Englund, but this was not one of those cases.
So here I had again a funny Englund gambit. The enemy refused the gambit, but still didn't make it past move 8.
I got a chance to sacrifice my queen, and so I did, but the enemy also refused my queen sacrifice.
Fortunately he did that in such a way that he was going to lose a piece, and once that reality dawned upon him he resigned. 😀 😀 😀
http://tinyurl.com/Qsac-getaway
@congruent saidI would have tried ASAP for 0-0.
[fen]r3kb1r/pp3pp1/q1p1pn1p/8/8/2N1BQ2/PP1R1PPP/5RK1 b kq - 3 15[/fen]
Here black comfortably 2 pawns up, no need for Nd5. What would you have played as black?
[pgn][Event "Rated Classical game"]
[Site "https://lichess.org/UUNGAhF8"]
[Date "2024.02.14"]
[White "Carnivorum"]
[Black "szyart"]
[Result "0-1"]
[UTCDate "2024.02.14"]
[UTCTime "21:21:38"]
[WhiteElo ...[text shortened]... . Nxd5 cxd5 17. a3 Be7 18. Qg3 O-O 19. Bxh6 Bf6 20. Be3 Rac8 21. h3 Qa4 22. Rd4 Bxd4 0-1
[/pgn]
Probably Be7.
So in Lichess just now I got paired with a 1763?
The question mark indicates he is a new player. Or an old one who made a new nick, but I thought: "Probably a new player, probably not familiar with the Blackburne - Shilling trap, so let's give it a try."
Thus thought, thus played. He played an Italian against me, I threw my horse forward to d4, thereby depriving my e5 pawn from it's protection.
That was enough to make the enemy gobble up the poisoned d5 pawn, and he continued to choke on it.
After the enemy had taken my e5 pawn, my queen moved to g5. The enemy now thought he could with impunity fork my queen and castle.
Oh what a terrible mistake!
After the fork my queen smacked in on g2, attacking the enemy castle.
The enemy could take my castle on h8, but after me taking his h1 castle, he would lose his queen, so that would have been a fatal mistake. So his horse jumped to d6, checking my king. That nuisance was eradicated by my bishop from f8 taking the hostile d6 horse. That made me be a horse up in the game.
But that was just the beginning.
His queen went to h5, checking my king. I thought it to be ill advisable to play g6, so I moved my majesty to d8. He then saved his castle by playing it to f1, right next to the king.
And then I really got going.
My queen went to e4, check. His bishop intervened, it went to e2, and blocked the check.
Then my trusty horse jumped to c2, and forked both king and castle.
In contradistinction to the feeble horse fork which the enemy made on move 5 and which came to nothing, my horse fork was a killer, and wreaked havoc in the white position. After the enemy king moved to d1, my horsed jumped upon his castle, and removed it from the board. http://tinyurl.com/dev-hors-4k
After his castle was taken, he moved his last horse to c3, attacking my queen.
I immediately punished this audacious behavior by planting my queen on c2, right by his king, checking him, but being protected by my horse on a1.
The enemy king then moved back to e1, and my queen removed his c1 bishop, giving check again.
At this point the enemy was 12 points behind in material.
He interjected his left over bishop on d1 to stop the check, but finally it dawned upon him that further resistance was futile, and he surrendered unconditionally.
The Blackburne - Shilling trap has hit again!
Those are the chess games I like. 😀
https://tinyurl.com/BS-what-wrong
And here a Tennison gambit made short work of the enemy, who came out of the opening with a castle missing.
https://i.ibb.co/KVh9ryY/deadly-Tennison.png
The enemy sacced a horse for attacking chances, but that came to nothing, and in no time he was 11 points behind in material.
When then the enemy also fell victim to a Horrible Royal Horse Fork, he surrendered unconditionally.
Oh how I love trappy gambits!
https://imgpile.com/images/dQQQx3.png
@carnivorum saidIn the position being discussed (which was reached after 15.Rd2)
I would have tried ASAP for 0-0.
Probably Be7.
15...Be7 would seem reasonable. However, White would have the annoying 16.Qg3 (Threatening 17.Qxg7.), and if 16...O-O, then 17.Bxh6.
Thus, Black's lagging development has become a nuisance. This raises the question of whether Black had unnecessarily lost time earlier.
Here's the position after 13.Qf3.
Two consequences of 13...Qxd3 were that it put Black further behind in development and that it opened the d-file. It seems to me that having an extra pawn already, Black ought to have kept the position fairly closed until fully developed.
Another position that seemed significant was reached after 8.cxd3.
Black's 8...h6 lost time and made the possible the tactic Bxh6 mentioned earlier. Why not 8...e6 immediately? 9.Nxe6 would be defused by 9...fxe6 10.Qxe6+ Qe7 and the exchange of queens. If 9.O-O, then 9...Be7, soon to be followed by ...O-O.
Yes that was actually Carnivorum as white who lost but I attempted to make him see the position as black. Black's timewasting could come to bite him but white didn't have a great opening.
The middlegame is where you spend time thinking and if you wasted time in the opening the middle is not so great.
It's like going on a trip with limited water, you sprinkle the water bottle in the air then wonder why you are very thirsty later.
Got an Englund gambit who went exactly according to the book; mate on move 8.
😀 😀 😀
http://tinyurl.com/Englu-mat-8
And yet another Englund gambit after which the enemy could have come away with the loss of a full horse, but in stead he made the wrong move, and that was going to cost him a queen, and when he realized that he pushed the resign button.
That was on move 8. 😆 😆 😆
http://tinyurl.com/Englu-killer
@congruent saidYou think that when 1600s and 1700s are gobbling me up, then I should should start playing 1900s?
Have you played any one over 1900 recently? 1600s and 1700s seem to be gobbling you up, might be time to re=evaluate opening strategy.
[pgn][Event "Rated Classical game"]
[Site "https://lichess.org/A86ine7G"]
[Date "2024.02.17"]
[White "emil70"]
[Black "Carnivorum"]
[Result "1-0"]
[UTCDate "2024.02.17"]
[UTCTime "16:51:01"]
[WhiteElo "1744"]
[BlackElo "1880"]
[ ...[text shortened]... ictorious
1
congruent
Spectator room
Notes
Please be nice in the chat!
friends online[/pgn]
You think that'll remedy the problem??