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

Only Chess Forum

  1. 22 Jan '13 20:35 / 1 edit
    For some reason the last move of this game actually made me smile. I was white.



    I knew ignoring the pawn at the end was risky, but somehow I thought I'd manage. Well, I didn't.
  2. 23 Jan '13 09:16
    I think you lost it by moving 33. Rhh7. There are a few alternatives that block the mate threat, but 33. Rxg5 is probably the one that gets you fastest in an advantageous endgame. Don't know if it is easy to win though. Black has doubled pawns twice and you have the knight, but there is some work to be done.
  3. 23 Jan '13 14:24
    Exactly. The problem was that I was under time pressure and I was afraid I wouldn't be able to win a long endgame requiring precision. I'm not bad at endgames for my level (though I obviously suck from the point of view of anyone who can actually play chess), but it didn't look like it was going to be a series of obvious moves. So I just decided to attack the king hoping I wouldn't get punished.
  4. 23 Jan '13 16:26 / 1 edit
    You might not have been irritated but I am.

    What are you doing? You are a Blog reader.

    You never save an undeveloped Rook if it takes an active enemy piece out of the game.

    How many examples have I blogged stating you should never do this.

    Here White to play, you played 18.Rh2??


    It amazes me that New Orleans is not the earthquake capital of the world
    due to amount of times you guys spin Morphy in his grave.

    18.0-0-0 is the move.
    You are giving up an undeveloped Rook for his only active piece and
    you are already a piece up! After 18...Bxh1 19.Rxh1


    You have threats all over the board and now the light squared Bishop has gone
    those two Knights are better than any Rook. Just look at all the juicy light squares
    that now belong to those Knights.



    And here you played 25.Ne6??


    What is it with you and the exchange?
    Do you have a chess book somewhere that says winning the exchange is better
    than giving checkmate.

    I've got my eye on you Wandering King, you had better wise up.

    The move you missed because you were blinded by the winning of the exchnage was....




  5. 23 Jan '13 16:32
    Well,you overlooked a mate in 2.It happens.I'm not too fond of capturing the bishop,it gives black a clear goal: try and remove all pawns = draw.Preventing that could be a pain.

    Instead the simple a3 removes all mate threats,you keep your rooks and black shouldn't survive too long.

    Reducing pieces doesn't always make things simpler.
  6. 24 Jan '13 09:18 / 1 edit
    You never save an undeveloped Rook if it takes an active enemy piece out of the game.

    How many examples have I blogged stating you should never do this.

    Here White to play, you played 18.Rh2??



    It amazes me that New Orleans is not the earthquake capital of the world
    due to amount of times you guys spin Morphy in his grave.




    18.0-0-0 is the move.
    You are giving up an undeveloped Rook for his only active piece and
    you are already a piece up! After 18...Bxh1 19.Rxh1


    Well... I don't get it! If the rook on h1 was undeveloped, then after 18...Bxh1 19.Rxh1, I have a rook there again! And I just didn't think that bishop was that active... Does it have anywhere to go after Rh2? Bh3 makes the bishop passive I think. Bg3 was played, and bishop was lost anyway. Be4 and Bd5 drop the bishop, and if Bc6, then NxB PxN, and the black king is stuck in the middle of the board... That's what I thought anyway.


    And here you played 25.Ne6??



    What is it with you and the exchange?
    Do you have a chess book somewhere that says winning the exchange is better
    than giving checkmate.


    I didn't want the exchange at all! Ne6 was the last move I saw, when I already was so low on time that I had to play something. I remember which moves I considered: Qa8, Ncb5, Ndb5, Nxc6, Re7. It was just too much for me!

    I wish I could say I was anywhere close to seeing Na4, but I wasn't. I think I wouldn't have seen in it if I had twice the time... Sorry, it just look like genius to me.
  7. 24 Jan '13 13:57 / 1 edit
    It's principles Wandering King.
    You must stand by your principles and your confidence.


    You don't waste time looking to see if it is sound and start analysing the position.
    JUST DO IT!

    Forget the pawn=1 Knight = 3 Rook = 5 nonsense, it's clouding your brain.

    If you want to count something count Tempo.
    Both kings are uncasted, all four Rooks are unmoved, though it's move 17
    we are still in the opening.

    If Black takes that Rook he has wasted 5 moves to get it (count the move g5-g4
    which was part of the plan.)
    You have a pinned Bishop and an undeveloped Rook on a1.

    Castle! and after Bxh1 and Rxh1.


    You have every piece in action and those Knights. What wonderful Knights.
    Also remembering you are already a piece up and after castles you are still
    a piece up.

    The win/loss of the exchange comes to the fore when the Queens are off.
    Then you must rein yourself in and play normal chess.


    Here you say you spent 5 minutires looking for the killer.
    You say Na4 looks like the move of a genius.

    No.

    Again you are giving priority to the Rule of Thumb .
    Knights on the rim look dim etc..etc..
    So it was not even given a second look.

    Your job is to find moves that break the Rules of Thumb.
    These are the genius moves and it within us all to play them.

    So never ever think about saving a naff Rook v an active piece.
    If you do you will have lost a tempo and his active piece will still be on the board.
    And don't waste time looking to see what play you have.
    Just do it. You have blackmailed yourself into playing actively. So you will.
  8. 24 Jan '13 21:32
    Originally posted by WanderingKing
    [b]You never save an undeveloped Rook if it takes an active enemy piece out of the game.

    How many examples have I blogged stating you should never do this.

    Here White to play, you played 18.Rh2??


    [fen]r3kb1r/ppp1q2p/3p1p2/8/2PN2p1/2N3P1/PPQ1BPb1/R3K2R w KQkq - 0 18[/fen]
    [i]It amazes me that New Orleans is not the earthquake capita ...[text shortened]... wouldn't have seen in it if I had twice the time... Sorry, it just look like genius to me.[/b]
    I don't think he is talking about the Rh1 being undeveloped... its the rook on a1 that you're trading. Think of it this way the bishop on g2 and your rook on a1 both dissapear meaning those are the pieces that were traded.
  9. 24 Jan '13 22:46
    Originally posted by tomtom232
    I don't think he is talking about the Rh1 being undeveloped... its the rook on a1 that you're trading. Think of it this way the bishop on g2 and your rook on a1 both dissapear meaning those are the pieces that were traded.
    Oh, of course! What I said was totally dumb.

    You might not have been irritated but I am.

    What are you doing? You are a Blog reader.


    Don't be irritated. Reading your blog has already made me a significantly better player than I used to be. Before, I'd learn openings by heart and just try to avoid losing material. Now I've forgotten most of the openings, and I'm not afraid to sac material. Well, not as much as before. I still don't like taking too much risk. And I often don't see possible sacrifices, but I do look for them.
  10. 24 Jan '13 22:49 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by WanderingKing
    Oh, of course! What I said was totally dumb.

    You might not have been irritated but I am.

    What are you doing? You are a Blog reader.


    Don't be irritated. Reading your blog has already made me a significantly better player than I used to be. Before, I'd learn openings by heart and just try to avoid losing material. Now I've forgotten mos e taking too much risk. And I often don't see possible sacrifices, but I do look for them.
    I think the problem, as with most of us patzers, is the dreaded quiet move. The next step in tactics is to see moves that threaten to make threats if that makes sense.
  11. 25 Jan '13 01:33
    I'm not really irrated. I did end my piece with a .

    Just hate to see routine moves when there was other punishing moves
    in the position. Think about the opposite what your opponent would expect you to play.
    If he sacs something v you. First thought should be what happens if I DON'T take it.
    If he attacks your Queen. What happens if you don't move it.
    You should always be looking What happens if moves.

    At the under 1800 level having the initaitive is everything. You will get inexact
    moves played against you. All that varies will be the how bad the inexact move is.

    This game was good. It would not look out of place in my Black games folder.

    LosPie - WanderingKing RHP 2011

  12. 25 Jan '13 11:02
    Hi Greenpawn.

    This game has been posted here before: http://www.redhotpawn.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=140917&page=&page=3

  13. 25 Jan '13 20:41
    This is of immediate interest to me. I am playing a game right now where I can win an undeveloped rook using a very good knight. Note, this will not be an exchange of the knight for the rook, but rather a win of the rook, with the result being my knight not being very good in the corner of the board (so not quite in line with GP's rule about not exchanging an active piece for an undeveloped rook). Now this thread has me rethinking my thinking!

    Again, my game is in progress, so please no comments about my exact situation.

    Cheers.
  14. 26 Jan '13 00:17
    I did it, I took the rook. I think its ok.