I played these two on chesscube.com. I'm such a bad tactician... Can you please tell what I should have chaged? After first I decided to change in the move 8. I saw something that seemed to me like a dangerous attack, but it wasn't. Or was but I don't see it now. Both were 30 mins for a game.
Originally posted by National Master Dale
16...c5 instead of 16...Qd7 might be a game one improvement
I didn't see the move. I simply didn't notice that the bishop will be protected and it scared me so much I stopped thinking rationally.
Originally posted by National Master Dale
In game 2 sacrificing on c3 is highly speculative.
Again I didn't see the simple bishop move. I was so happy when I saw myself attacking f2 and c3 at the same time. It's just too much for me too take so many things into account... This maybe seems funny to you, but I simply can't do it.
Originally posted by National Master Dale
3...d5 may be stronger than 3...g6
I am thinking of it and I just don't see. For me it looks like it would transpose back to what I played.
Originally posted by heinzkat
In the first game you should not have let your King stroll off
I knew I'm going right into the gates of hell. But I didn't see any alternative. Save a rooks' trade. But I thought It's very bad to swap material when he has such an advantage.
Thank you everybody for your insight.
I actually was inspired by this thread ...hehe did you know that it was inspirational...
Anyways today at a coffee shop i tried it out and woohoo it worked really great.
I played 3.Bb5 instead of 3.Bc4 for all the games though but basically i just played like the thread and scored super well.
This is now a new secret weapon methinks.