Go back
Blunder Wins

Blunder Wins

Only Chess

Vote Up
Vote Down

You ever have a game where your opponent blunders so bad you just want to say, "No, take that move back"? I'm sure my esteemed opponent slapped his head when he saw this. 🙂

Vote Up
1
Vote Down

Originally posted by USArmyParatrooper
You ever have a game where your opponent blunders so bad you just want to say, "No, take that move back"? I'm sure my esteemed opponent slapped his head when he saw this. 🙂

[pgn]
[Event "Challenge"]
[Site "http://www.redhotpawn.com"]
[Date "2013.06.06"]
[EndDate "2013.06.09"]
[Round "?"]
[White "USArmyParatrooper"]
[Black "littlecritter" ...[text shortened]... e4 c5 2. Ng1f3 d5 3. exd5 Qd8xd5 4. Nb1c3 Qd5c6 5. Bf1b5 1-0[/pgn]
No, because I need the points back after my horrific blunders in the other games.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by USArmyParatrooper
You ever have a game where your opponent blunders so bad you just want to say, "No, take that move back"? I'm sure my esteemed opponent slapped his head when he saw this. 🙂

[pgn]
[Event "Challenge"]
[Site "http://www.redhotpawn.com"]
[Date "2013.06.06"]
[EndDate "2013.06.09"]
[Round "?"]
[White "USArmyParatrooper"]
[Black "littlecritter" ...[text shortened]... e4 c5 2. Ng1f3 d5 3. exd5 Qd8xd5 4. Nb1c3 Qd5c6 5. Bf1b5 1-0[/pgn]
Reminds me of a twist on the harassment of a Q on c6.

First google hit.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Why give up Bishop pair and double pawns with 6. d3?

Why no royal fork the first time?

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by USArmyParatrooper
Why give up Bishop pair and double pawns with 6. d3?

Why no royal fork the first time?
He probablly did not see it the first time.

The Instructor

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by USArmyParatrooper
Why give up Bishop pair and double pawns with 6. d3?

Why no royal fork the first time?
Doubled pawns that control central squares are fine.

White just missed the first Nc7+. Clearly, from the way the game ended, he was capable of seeing it. Just carelessness.

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

One of my Chess.com games:

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by vivify
One of my Chess.com games:

[pgn][Date "????.??.??"]
[Result "*"]
[FEN "rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - 0 1"]

1.d3 d5 2.b3 d4 3.g3 Qd5 { I actually broke the rule about taking the queen out early. The attack on the H square seemed worth it, since it would stifle white's development a bit. } 4.f3 e5 5.Bg2 Bb4+ 6.c3 dxc3 7.e4 { And ...[text shortened]... d2# { All this destruction on white, and I didn't lose a single piece. }
*[/pgn]
9...Qe1#

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by vivify
One of my Chess.com games:

[pgn][Date "????.??.??"]
[Result "*"]
[FEN "rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - 0 1"]

1.d3 d5 2.b3 d4 3.g3 Qd5 { I actually broke the rule about taking the queen out early. The attack on the H square seemed worth it, since it would stifle white's development a bit. } 4.f3 e5 5.Bg2 Bb4+ 6.c3 dxc3 7.e4 { And d2# { All this destruction on white, and I didn't lose a single piece. }
*[/pgn]
White's development needn't be stifled if he plays 4.Nf3.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by SwissGambit
White's development needn't be stifled if he plays 4.Nf3.
Good point. I'll remember not to take the Queen out early anytime soon.

And Ketchup, good eye. I miss things so easily when I'm mindful of time.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by vivify
Good point. I'll remember not to take the Queen out early anytime soon.

And Ketchup, good eye. I miss things so easily when I'm mindful of time.
What was the time control? Kibitzer sight should always be 20/20

Vote Up
1
Vote Down

The time control was a shamefully long 10/0. An eternity to three-minute players. So really, there was no good excuse for me to miss the mate in 9. I just suck.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by USArmyParatrooper
You ever have a game where your opponent blunders so bad you just want to say, "No, take that move back"? I'm sure my esteemed opponent slapped his head when he saw this. 🙂

[pgn]
[Event "Challenge"]
[Site "http://www.redhotpawn.com"]
[Date "2013.06.06"]
[EndDate "2013.06.09"]
[Round "?"]
[White "USArmyParatrooper"]
[Black "littlecritter" ...[text shortened]... e4 c5 2. Ng1f3 d5 3. exd5 Qd8xd5 4. Nb1c3 Qd5c6 5. Bf1b5 1-0[/pgn]
I have from both sides. When playing OTB, I hate winning by default simply because I am sitting on the other side, and I hate giving someone a gift when they did not deserve it. I feel that such results demonstrate the truth of the human condition more than the truth of chess.

I can only play a finite and limited number of OTB games, and I hate wasting such opportunities.

In this format I am not so concerned. Since we can use books and database during our game, I don't have as much personally invested in it, and I can always immediately start another game.