Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Only Chess Forum

Only Chess Forum

  1. 24 Feb '11 03:25 / 1 edit
    Finished this game a few days ago and would like some advise in general, and specifics if you all do not mind. Thanks!

    I played white 1279 vs black 1557. There are some big mistakes made on both parts, I just would like to see some mistakes that we didn't catch!

  2. 24 Feb '11 03:55

    I have not time to do an in depth analysis but from here:
    11. NxB

    11. ... NxB is not possible because of QxN and black's game is over.

    If 11. ... QxB 12. QxQ NxQ followed by 0-0, and white has a comfortable game.
    I would like to play 0-0-0 but the game would be abit more interesting because of the open b file for black.
  3. 24 Feb '11 04:26 / 3 edits
    Nice game for you. He might could have won (see #7 below). In any case, it was a nice win for you. The value of tempo and a pawn.

    Some comments:

    1. You lost a piece (for two pawns) in the late opening. Usually not a good thing. Not sure the options to avoid that. Also, not familiar with that line of Sicilian (I noticed you did 3.Nc3 instead of the conventional 3.Nf3). Later, 10.Bf4 might have been better than the 10.Bg5 you did -- might have prevented you losing the piece.

    Just a weird variation of the Sicilian to me overall but I don't know openings like one should. Normally, it may be better (not always but mostly) on move 5 to take the d4 pawn with 5. Nxd4 instead of 5. Qxd4.

    2. But you did use your extra two pawns effectively in applying pressure by pushing them in my opinion.

    3. You had some balls to trade Qs being a piece down, but then again you had the extra two pawns.

    4. Of course he did sac his B to get one of your extra pawns. And thus overall, you ended up a pawn up.

    5. But then you let your f-h pawns go which I may understand, but kind of risky and also you may have could have forced him to spend a couple of extra crucial moves to get your king-side pawns (see #6 below).

    6. On move 32, I would have 32.f3 (not 32.c5 you did). I know you liked the tempo of pushing the pawn to c5 (I always like pushing the passed pawn), but I think I would have instead 32.f3 (instead of 32.c5) to force him to spend a couple extra moves to get to your king-side pawns.

    7. At first glance, I believe he should have 39 . . . h3 (instead of 39 . . . Kh5). He should have spent two immediate moves to get his h-pawn to h2. (Again, I always like advancing a passed pawn - can apply incredible pressure).

    That would have forced your Rd1 to stop him queening at h1.

    The game would have been a different flavor, and you couldn't have interposed with your R his check of your K with his R, for example.

    Anyway, he then uses his tempo gain of your Rd1 move to advance his K to support his advanced h-pawn (leaving his g-pawn where it was at g6). (In this position it seemed like a waste of tempo for him to advance his g-pawn.)

    A possible line:

    39 . . . . h3!
    40. Kc6 h2
    41. Rd1 Kg4
    42. b7 Kg3
    43. Kc7 Kg2
    44. c8 Rxc8
    45. Kxc8 h1
    46. Rxh1 Kxh1

    An obvious win for him. He has the only remaining pawn, and King position with his K at the queening square and your K on the other side of the board. No chance of a draw for you.

    Of course, you may could have deviated in the above line.
  4. 24 Feb '11 04:27 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Tiwaking
    I miss descriptive notation. I noticed you used it.
  5. 24 Feb '11 04:50
    Originally posted by moon1969
    I miss descriptive notation. I noticed you used it.
    I grew up with the Fischer vs Spassky World Championship book which was in descriptive notation and I get abit muddled up with algebraic notation.

    Although the opening variation was unusual, I thought it was pretty interesting.
  6. 24 Feb '11 05:04
    Originally posted by Tiwaking
    Although the opening variation was unusual, I thought it was pretty interesting.
    Agreed that the opening was interesting. I don't know if it is good, bad, or neutral, and for which side. But interesting. I wondered if they followed a book line.
  7. 24 Feb '11 05:16
    first of all congratulations for a well played game, i've watched many games from players around 1300 and this one has clearly less blunders than what i expected. I'd say it's more you who played above your rating 1600 than him playing under his.

    Your opening is ok, many people would criticize you choice of 5.Qxd4 instead of the usual Nxd4 but actually perfectly playable. Move 7 i would have retreated my queen (to d3 for example), since on principle bishops are a bit superior to knights especially in open positions like these, but that's not really a mistake, just a general strategic consideration.
    Then you play energetically (8.e5!) and get a good position by move 12 with pressure on the d file, forcing him to enter complications with Nd5.

    then you make your 1st big mistake : 16.Bxf6?, forgetting that it will open the 7th rank so his rook defends the d7 bishop when parrying the check.
    The kind of oversight that easily happens OTB even to good players.
    But even if there wasn't this tactical flaw, it's dubious on general principles to lose a time to snatch a pawn in such a tense and open position (especially with your king not castled yet). just let him lose time (and get a bad pawn structure) capturing your knight :
    you should have played simple 16.Qd5+ directly. For example : 16...e6 17.Qxd7 Qxd7 18.Rxd7 fxg5 19.00 would have given you an excellent game.

    After that mistake you still get 3 pawns vs 1 on the queenside but he is a bishop up, and since your pawns aren't advanced, his piece up gives him the advantage (but not a very big one, your pawns are dangerous)
    then apart from a mutual oversight (see game notes), he gradually loses the thread, especially when uselessly leaving his f6 pawn en prise, and you play good, sensible chess, activating your pawn majority and bringing your king to the center. (no time for the endgame now! might come back to it later, although i'm not sure i like your decision to leave him take your 3 pawns to advance your pawn, i have to take a closer look)

    [/b]
  8. 24 Feb '11 05:27
    Originally posted by moon1969
    Nice game for you. He might could have won (see #7 below). In any case, it was a nice win for you. The value of tempo and a pawn.

    Some comments:

    1. You lost a piece (for two pawns) in the late opening. Usually not a good thing. Not sure the options to avoid that. Also, not familiar with that line of Sicilian (I noticed you did 3.Nc3 instead of ...[text shortened]... rd. No chance of a draw for you.

    Of course, you may could have deviated in the above line.
    crossing of post! didn't read yours while i was typing mine...but we seem to agree (and i think you're right about the endgame which i didn't have time to cover!)
  9. 24 Feb '11 05:36
    Originally posted by shorbock
    crossing of post! didn't read yours while i was typing mine...but we seem to agree (and i think you're right about the endgame which i didn't have time to cover!)
    I like your comments.
  10. Standard member ChessPraxis
    Cowboy From Hell
    24 Feb '11 06:07
    Originally posted by shorbock
    first of all congratulations for a well played game, i've watched many games from players around 1300 and this one has clearly less blunders than what i expected. I'd say it's more you who played above your rating 1600 than him playing under his.

    Your opening is ok, many people would criticize you choice of 5.Qxd4 instead of the usual Nxd4 but actually p ...[text shortened]... b6 Kh5h4 45. b8=Q g3 46. Qb8f4 Kh4h5 47. Qf4xg3 1-0[/pgn]
    [/b]
    I like 5. Qxd5, and play similar lines meselfs.
  11. 24 Feb '11 06:25
    Originally posted by ChessPraxis
    I like 5. Qxd5, and play similar lines meselfs.
    I am thinking you meant Qxd4 (not Qxd5).

    Anyway, I kind of like doing Qxd4 as white against the hyper-accelerated dragon of the Sicilian.

    Seems to throw some hypers off their game. Though not really in this game below (in progress) against a 2245 rated player I am playing where I did Qxd4 against his hyper-accelerated dragon.

    Game 8067664

    A downside I think for Qxd4 in more conventional Sicilian lines is that it gives black opportunity to develop pieces and at the same time attack white's queen, and thus black gains tempo.

    Kind of the traditional reason in general not to develop a Q early (especially not early to the center of the board).
  12. Standard member ChessPraxis
    Cowboy From Hell
    01 Mar '11 04:57
    Originally posted by moon1969
    I am thinking you meant Qxd4 (not Qxd5).

    Anyway, I kind of like doing Qxd4 as white against the hyper-accelerated dragon of the Sicilian.

    Seems to throw some hypers off their game. Though not really in this game below (in progress) against a 2245 rated player I am playing where I did Qxd4 against his hyper-accelerated dragon.

    Game 8067664 ...[text shortened]... l reason in general not to develop a Q early (especially not early to the center of the board).
    I think I know what I meant....oh wait, quite right sir d4.