Finally an OTB Win

Originally posted by no1marauder
Only "2100+"?

Those aren't RHP ratings, a player rated 2100 USCF is a very strong player indeed.

RJH meant to say 100000110100 rated opponents.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Only "2100+"?

Those aren't RHP ratings, a player rated 2100 USCF is a very strong player indeed.

I don't know the figures but I guess anyone over 2000 over the board(OTB ) would be in the top 5% of all chess players so very good indeed compared to an average joe like me.

Notice I said "OTB". Online rating are meaningless because some people cannot be trusted when they think they can get away with doing something immoral. I'm sure in the not so distant future the same will be true of OTB with technological advances.

Shame.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Only "2100+"?

Those aren't RHP ratings, a player rated 2100 USCF is a very strong player indeed.

Like I said they don't come every week and I have never had a chance to play anyone over 1900+ USCF. I beat only one of those in a G/90 and he was 1941 at that time. I have lost to much lower rated players when we play G/25 and G/45. The G/45 games are rated both for regular and quick ratings. I don't play well at these time controls because I can't think fast enough. But I am trying to get used to playing faster.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Like I said they don't come every week and I have never had a chance to play anyone over 1900+ USCF. I beat only one of those in a G/90 and he was 1941 at that time. I have lost to much lower rated players when we play G/25 and G/45. The G/45 games are rated both for regular and quick ratings. I don't play well at these time controls because I can't think fast enough. But I am trying to get used to playing faster.

That's up to you. The major tournaments normally have much longer time controls; 2 hours for 40 plus 1 hour for the rest of the game is typical.

Originally posted by no1marauder
That's up to you. The major tournaments normally have much longer time controls; 2 hours for 40 plus 1 hour for the rest of the game is typical.

Yeah, that was what I was used to playing when I was younger at the chess club in Virginia. I did not play in but two tournaments back then. I was unrated in my first tournament at the Eastern Open and did not do to good in that one. In my last tournament at the World Open in 1982, I was rated 1500+ and finished in a 3-way tie for first in the 1600 and under division. I got $4500 in prize money and all winners were given a 100 point rating bonus on top of that.

Hi RJ.

Yes I agree that 30 odd years away from the game and you can forget your
opening theory. But basic opening principles. I would have thought that
would have stuck.
Mind you I have no experince in that area as the longest I've been away from
the game was 10 years. (that is from the day I was born till I learned the moves.)

You seem to remember some principles:

"I know of the warning not to take the queen knight pawn in the opening...."

Would you have taken the b-pawn if White had played....


12.Kh1

White gets a ton of OTB compensation if you do.
(well I think so. d4 next with e5 threats and x-ray attacks on f7 with Rb1
and Rxb7 also in in there...AND NO CHECKS...it was his failure to get his big fellah
away in the corner that led to the lose of the Rook.)

Was 18. Rxd6 The slamming of a trap or blunder?



I like looking at these things and trying to figure out the reasons why
players blunder. (this knowledge is critical for my way of playing).
Good players need a postional edge. I need blunders...tactical blunders.

Fortunately 100's of my OTB opponents have blundered in the messy and
lost positions I thrive on.
I think this is because I know how bad I am and they think they are better
than what they are.

Also I'm good at nailing the shot. I have very very few blown won games on my CV.
That is because I never have the won game for long, just the last few moves. 🙂


I'm going for blunder. I'll explain why.

White started it back here it. He has just played Bb6 chasing the Rook to e8
and his beady eye has spotted the d6 pawn.


White to play. He played 16.Bd4

(me...I'm lured by 16.Nd5 cxd5 17 Qa3 and the fun begins. The attack can
be better prepared but I'm for sticking him blunderland ASAP.)

Black never forced White to play 16.Bd4 the idea in White's mind was
always Bxf6 and if Black does not play Bxf6 then doubled pawns for Black.
The open g-file won't matter because Qf5+ comes next and the Queens are off.
He was then possibly thinking of how to swing the Knight onto the f5 outpost
when you played Bxf6. "OK I'll take the pawn."
End of analysis. BANG! 0-1.

No psychology involved. Just honest 1700 OTB thinking.

This is a trap from the same setting.
The trick is identical but it is Black who sets the ball rolling.
You will see the difference.

Marko Krale - rosaline HP 2005 Game 1156309

"Beware of the lady offering pawns...."

Originally posted by greenpawn34
Hi RJ.

Yes I agree that 30 odd years away from the game and you can forget your
opening theory. But basic opening principles. I would have thought that
would have stuck.
Mind you I have no experince in that area as the longest I've been away from
the game was 10 years. (that is from the day I was born till I learned the moves.)

You seem to rem d6 {Recognise that move?} 22... Qc5+ {And that one. White too resigned.}[/pgn]

As I pointed out in my notes, 11...Qb6+ was an impulse move after I saw the double attack. I had no real plan other than to play quickly to avoid getting into time trouble later in the game and lose on time which I had done in a previous G/45 match in Evans two days before after being two pawns up but allowing a strong attack against my king. I had spent too much time in the early portions of that game to gain those pawns and did not have enough time left to accurately calculate my defense of my attacked king and after giving back a pawn and consolidating my position my opponent pointed to the clock and sighed with relief and claimed his win.

You are right that after 12.Kh1 Qxb2? 13.d4! gives him a more superior position than he would have by ny not taking the pawn. So in that case, it would probably be best for me to castle long or play 12,,,Be7 preparing to castle in either direction.

You say (me...I'm lured by 16.Nd5 cxd5 17 Qa3 and the fun begins. The attack can
be better prepared but I'm for sticking him blunderland ASAP.)

You would be wise to better prepare it for that will not work.



You misunderstand psychology, for it does not force, but entice the opponent to make the blunder.

"You misunderstand psychology, for it does not force, but entice the opponent
to make the blunder."

Yeah OK...except I was talking about the Knight sac in this position.
If you are going to supply some analysis at least get the right position.


When (after Nd5 cxd5, Qa3) I'm threatening Qa8+. (I was thinking....Nd7
holds but it's not over.)
I'd certainly give it a going over in a game and blitz/skitz why not play it?).

All the psychology takes place before the game when a lot of games are won
or lost.
During the game, especially at the Rook hanging stage, psychology plays
no part. It's all about calculation and blundering.

I did not know you were 68. Not a bad game for an OAP.
But I'd leave psychology out of it. Just try to play soundly and keep your
pieces off unprotected squares when there are checks in the position and
you should be OK. If that is psychology then so be it.

Originally posted by RJHinds
As I pointed out in my notes, 11...Qb6+ was an impulse move after I saw the double attack. I had no real plan other than to play quickly to avoid getting into time trouble later in the game and lose on time which I had done in a previous G/45 match in Evans two days before after being two pawns up but allowing a strong attack against my king. I had spent to ...[text shortened]... isunderstand psychology, for it does not force, but entice the opponent to make the blunder.

flip sake Ronald you old blether, you sound like you have a mind ray left over from
when the ruskkies fleeced the podium that Fischer and Spassky were playing on. You
are a Fischer fan i take it, being American? well he famously stated that he's not
interested in psychology, but in good moves 🙂

Originally posted by greenpawn34
"You misunderstand psychology, for it does not force, but entice the opponent
to make the blunder."

Yeah OK...except I was talking about the Knight sac in this position.
If you are going to supply some analysis at least get the right position.

[fen]2k1r2r/1p2bppp/1Bpp1n2/4q3/4P3/2N2Q2/PPP3PP/3R1RK1 w - - 0 17[/fen]
When (after Nd5 cxd5, Qa3) I'm ...[text shortened]... re are checks in the position and
you should be OK. If that is psychology then so be it.

So you did not mean to start 16.Nd5 cxd5 17 Qa3 as you first said, but 17.Nd5 cxd5 18. Qa3 ... Okay, that looks a much better, but after 18...Nxe4 I don't think you will have enough compensation for your sacrificed Knight.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
flip sake Ronald you old blether, you sound like you have a mind ray left over from
when the ruskkies fleeced the podium that Fischer and Spassky were playing on. You
are a Fischer fan i take it, being American? well he famously stated that he's not
interested in psychology, but in good moves 🙂

Yeah, but I can not play OTB chess as good as Fischer. He was very good at speed chess too. I am terrible at speed chess and I need opponent's blunders to help me out.

Yup! Nxe4 looks better than my Nd7.
(something tells me the Black moves are going to be very good from now on) 😉

Well I think I do have OTB compensation for the Knight.
Esepcially when I look at the lead up play. I'd talk myself into the sac.
So you must allow me one plausible blunder.

Originally posted by greenpawn34
Yup! Nxe4 looks better than my Nd7.
(something tells me the Black moves are going to be very good from now on) 😉

Well I think I do have OTB compensation for the Knight.
Esepcially when I look at the lead up play. I'd talk myself into the sac.
So you must allow me one plausible blunder.

[pgn]
[FEN "2k1r2r/1p2bppp/1B1p4/3pq3/4n3/Q7/PPP3PP/3R1R heck. The King has to stay with the Rook.} 30. Ke1 Qxg2 {Now what's happening?}[/pgn]

Now how do you like your position?

P.S. You need to improve on your psychology, me thinks.

You would have fallen for it OTB.

Anybody who plays 0-0-0 and drops the a-pawn is not that blunder free. 😛

Originally posted by greenpawn34
You would have fallen for it OTB.

Anybody who plays 0-0-0 and drops the a-pawn is not that blunder free. 😛

But I have a free pawn just sitting there inviting me to take it. That is very enticing psychology, if you ask me.