In this blitz game my initial thought was to play 23. ... Nd4 (after which I think Black had good chances), but instead I played 23. ... Rxa3 to get a passed pawn. My greediness was compounded by failing to check all checks, leaving my rook open to a discovered attack with check, and I lost the exchange and eventually the game.
Originally posted by richjohnson"check all checks"....now just where have I seen that written....??
.......by failing to check all checks.....
Wait, I found it. It's been there all along on a little green post-it stuck to my monitor.
.... and not on a yellow one favoured by the queer naysayers.
Fancy that.....
skeets
Hi Rich
Yup!. Check all checks if you don't your opponent will.
How did it end? On time? That is not a straight forward win.
Rook v Knight with pawns on the same side the limitations of the short
stepping Knight can be masked.
The Lasker boys showed a good draw in 1924 K+N v K+R+P.
Suppose in blitz chess with no 3 fold rep available White can turn the game
into a complete farce by playing Rook a1-a8 til the clock runs down.
It always amuses me to see players doing this, as if the result of a skittles
blitz really matters. If it comes down to that and I'm ahead on time I usually
offer a draw.
No need to think you were lost after 'swapping' the Bishop for a Rook.
(The exchange is minimal in blitz.)
Here
you played 26...Ne2+ took the f-pawn and White took off the Queens with Qb3.
Save up your checks till they really do mean something.
Let's have some fun. Come fly with me.
Thanks gp!
Time was running low, which is partly why I missed the bishop check, but there were increments every move so we presumably could have danced the rook and knight around indefinitely until one of us made another blunder. I ultimately resigned because I didn't want to drag out a likely loss for that long.