- Joined
- 21 Apr 06
- Moves
- 4211
3 edits
After looking at the position for a few mins the things that stand out for me is whites light square control hitting blacks kinside pawns white is clearly creating focal points. h5 is on the cards opening up blacks king like a tin of sardines when the well coordinated pieces should have a feild day. Black has trouble with the misplaced rook and bishop after Nd6 these pieces might as well not be on the board......where as the white pieces are just better placed to harress the soon to be exposed black king.
Other things that comes to mind is all blacks pawns bar on are one light squares all whites bar one are on dark. Maybe whites c5 pawn is a bit weak but doubful if black can make anything of it for a bit.
Blacks knight might be nicely placed or so it would appear but whites knight on d6 seems so much better, white can challenge blacks knight square with the bishop is ever needed on the other hand the only way it seems black could challenge whites knight is by trading them which would leave d7 stupidly weak.
Originally posted by arrakisOK, Now I know exactly what you mean by annotations!
I'm not accusing you of being a cheater, but look at this thread to understand what an annotated game should look like:
http://www.redhotpawn.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=55256
thanks!
I will do it.
1 edit
Originally posted by Sicilian SmaugYou know, you can start by using "You" instead of "He" when you want to know what I mean!
Yes, the A pawn sounds like just about the most unimportant feature of this position. The a pawn is fulfilling a role in taking away a possible spot from the knight, what is to be done about it? Or is he talking about black's a pawn. Who is white?
You're the one who started this mess because it was suspicious for me to be nice with you in our games when I said "Hello", and now you're ignoring me?
What I mean by this A pawn it's because I have learned to to look at the 2 weakness when it's becoming to the end of a game.
So I know that at this time the Pawn A is not a matter, but it could be latter on...
- Joined
- 21 Apr 06
- Moves
- 4211
Originally posted by Stroubidoul2You were white in the game, do you mean whites pawn on a3?
You know, you can start by using "You" instead of "He" when you want to know what I mean!
You're the one who started this mess because it was suspicious for me to be nice with you in our games when I said "Hello", and now you're ignoring me?
What I mean by this A pawn it's because I have learned to to look at the 2 weakness when it's becoming to the e ...[text shortened]...
So I know that at this time the Pawn A is not a matter, but it could be latter on...
Game 2551097
Originally posted by BedlamYes
You were white in the game, do you mean whites pawn on a3?
Game 2551097
1 edit
Originally posted by Stroubidoul2Sorry but I don't see a grasp here of the strategic principles attached to this position. Why worry about the a or g pawns? Nd6 is an immediate and obvious danger and a great square for the N but why does it need to support of the B in attacking the R.
OK, so be nice with me (for once) because I never did that before and above all, it's in english 😉
Here is the situation after the 27w move:
black as 3 group of pawn, White as 2
I'm controlling the rows D and H, and my knight is willing to go to d6 to control the center and to support my bishop in the attack of his f tower. But I also need t ...[text shortened]... or his knight
so here is what can I say about a position, I hope it will be understandable
I know of no one else who calls a Rook a Tower. I have a few foreign language books and they all use R.
I think white stands better here because of white square control, do you agree? Why did you retreat the N from d6 to e4. A good answer might convince people you know what you are taking about
Originally posted by Stroubidoul2Yes. There were several losses against weak players, and they were not timeouts.
Originally posted by Nordlys
[b]A good player who doesn't play strong players will have a slower rating growth, but won't lose regularly against very weak players.
regularly?
did you even look at my games? [/b]
Originally posted by Sicilian SmaugOK forget it, you have made your point.
I only voiced my suspicions to the mods, I did not 'start this mess'. - At least 2 other people reported you. Winks or no winks in the greeting, I always look at my opponent's graph when starting new games, yours was one of the most blatant unnatural improvements I'd ever seen. I then checked all your early games and then many of your most recent game ...[text shortened]... do you claim to have used to go from patzer to expert level in the space of a few months?
You don't like like me, you are sure that I am a cheater, so there is no need to argue for me.
But please, let me plead my case without being the devil advocat
Originally posted by NordlysDon't get too carried away here. Don't we all lose to weaker players from time to time. I have occasionally blundered and lost against a 1400. Play enough games and that happens. OK I don't expect to lose to a genuinely 1200 player and I could give an 800 a Q and still win but someones rating could drop from 1500 to 800 due to 150 time outs.
Yes. There were several losses against weak players, and they were not timeouts.
Originally posted by Dragon FireI didn't, I was white
Sorry but I don't see a grasp here of the strategic principles attached to this position. Why worry about the a or g pawns? Nd6 is an immediate and obvious danger and a great square for the N but why does it need to support of the B in attacking the R.
I know of no one else who calls a Rook a Tower. I have a few foreign language books and they all use ...[text shortened]... the N from d6 to e4. A good answer might convince people you know what you are taking about[/b]