Hi all, don't know if this would be the appropriate forum for this, but I guess I'll just find out...
I'd really like some feedback on this game Game 4462025. Most importantly, I'd like to figure out where I made mistakes/where I missed opportunities.
Any criticism is more then welcome, aslong as it's constructive 😉 [edit] AKA, no bashing...[/edit]
Originally posted by konhenconstructive criticism wouldn't be any criticism now would it?
Hi all, don't know if this would be the appropriate forum for this, but I guess I'll just find out...
I'd really like some feedback on this game Game 4462025. Most importantly, I'd like to figure out where I made mistakes/where I missed opportunities.
[b]Any criticism is more then welcome, aslong as it's constructive 😉[/b]
and yes this is the appropriate forum.
Originally posted by konhenYes you're in the right place...at a quick glance I would say that on your move 14 you exchanged a Bishop for a pawn at a time when you had a material advantage...this move seems to give up this advantage and the only benefit was preventing your opponent from castling. This seemed to high a price to pay just as the board was beginning to open up and the bishop was about to become useful.
Hi all, don't know if this would be the appropriate forum for this, but I guess I'll just find out...
I'd really like some feedback on this game Game 4462025. Most importantly, I'd like to figure out where I made mistakes/where I missed opportunities.
[b]Any criticism is more then welcome, aslong as it's constructive 😉 [edit] AKA, no bashing...[/edit][/b]
Allowing the rook exchange with the f7 pawn recapture seriously weakened the light squares around your king...when your op has a light squared bishop and you don't.
Also the threat of the bishop and queen lined up on the long diagonal could do with some attention.
There is quite a bit to learn from this game so going through it will be worth while especially the opening moves... I hope you will excuse my quick glance and brief comments but you should find someone here willing to pass on some more useful insights.
There may have been missed tactics by either side in this game, but it's easier to find those with Fritz, Crafty or whatever.
As a general rule, it's usually best not to fianchetto both bishops. I think the reason for this is that one will be pointing towards the kingside and one towards the queenside, so they won't be working together well. This is a rule which can certainly be broken but it's just a piece of advice I was given when I was a beginner and I seem to end up with better positions when I follow it!
When you had lost your fianchettoed bishop, albeit winning the exchange for it, and your opponent still had his of the same colour, this left a huge weakness on the g7 and h6 squares. It was a mistake to then castle straight into the middle of those weaknesses as it made it very easy for your opponent to attack your king. Remember that the main reason for castling is to get your king to a safer part of the board - don't castle into an attack!
14. ... Bxc4 was just a blunder. It wasn't worth giving up a bishop for a pawn just to get a check in and prevent White from castling.
16. ... Na5 was weak because it forced White's queen to move to a square it wanted to move to anyway and left one of Black's knights on the edge of the board. Remember - knights on the rim and dim! Another rule which can be broken, but only if you have a good reason for doing so.
After 23. ... Nd5, which I thought was a good move, you had a chance of swapping off White's dark squared bishop. I would have done so without thinking twice due to your dark square weaknesses on g7 and h6. If you have several weaknesses all on a particular colour, try to swap off your opponent's bishop of that colour so that he has one less piece to exploit the weaknesses with.
Originally posted by tomtom232I don't agree with this. I thought White's third move - 3. d5 was weak. 3. ... c6 seems like a perfectly good move, if White plays 4. d6 then 4. ... exd6 5. Qxd6 Qe7 equalises.
well you should have been lost after whites move 4 but he didn't play d6 like he should have which means that 3...d6 for black was much better than 3...c6?
The reason I didn't like 3. d5 was that I think central pawns work better when they are next to each other, they attack the four squares in front of them that way! Obviously one has to be pushed eventually, but I like to defer the decision about which one is going to go forward as it's not something you can undo. 3. c3 would have been my choice, but 3. Nf3, 3. c4, 3. f4 are probably all perfectly playable as well.
Originally posted by tomtom232I didn't like whites early pawn push as it seemed to make blacks central dark squares very weak espcially in view of the fianchettoed bishop.
Did you not address move 3 because I had already said something...because I think move 3 by black was very critical.
When you mentioned pushing the pawn again then it made me think this might be part of a system that I don't know anything about so I just left it with the comment that - there is more to look at esp in the opening.
Originally posted by Fat Ladyyou're right...I forgot about the bishop on g7 otherwise Qe7 is met by e5...but with the bishop there e5 is a blunder.
I don't agree with this. I thought White's third move - 3. d5 was weak. 3. ... c6 seems like a perfectly good move, if White plays 4. d6 then 4. ... exd6 5. Qxd6 Qe7 equalises.
The reason I didn't like 3. d5 was that I think central pawns work better when they are next to each other, they attack the four squares in front of them that way! Obviously one h ...[text shortened]... d have been my choice, but 3. Nf3, 3. c4, 3. f4 are probably all perfectly playable as well.
Originally posted by konhen11...e5 is a stinker since it weakens control over the f6 square and exposes your naked fianchetto. Whenever you move your pawn to g6 and Bishop to g7, and then trade your dark-squared Bishop for your opponent's Rook, you have to be especially careful you don't get mated along the a1-h8 diagonal. Fortunately, your opponent didn't take advantage of the situation.
Hi all, don't know if this would be the appropriate forum for this, but I guess I'll just find out...
I'd really like some feedback on this game Game 4462025. Most importantly, I'd like to figure out where I made mistakes/where I missed opportunities.
[b]Any criticism is more then welcome, aslong as it's constructive 😉 [edit] AKA, no bashing...[/edit][/b]