06 Aug 08
4 edits
Does anyone know if this is a Bishop gambit or just poor play by my opponent by choosing to take my bishop? It was over in 11 moves.
I don't know any of the openings.
Game 5256869
06 Aug 08
Originally posted by uzlessBlack played the opening very badly; perhaps he was mixing his systems? The moves Nc6 and 0-0 followed by h6 and h6xg5 do not comport with basic chess strategy in this position. Also, he failed to occupy the center at an appropriate time with d5. If Black wanted to challenge the Bishop on g5, he could have refrained from castling, then played h6 and g5 later, and staged an assault on White's kingside once he got his own King safely tucked away on the queenside.
Does anyone know if this is a Bishop gambit or just poor play by my opponent by choosing to take my bishop? It was over in 11 moves.
I don't know any of the openings.
Game 5256869
06 Aug 08
2 edits
Originally posted by uzlessIts not a gambit and not really even a sacrifice but rather a perfectly legitimate combination that opens the Rook file for a decisive attack.
Does anyone know if this is a Bishop gambit or just poor play by my opponent by choosing to take my bishop? It was over in 11 moves.
I don't know any of the openings.
Game 5256869
Black must probably immediately play 8. ... g6 giving back the Knight and having a ruined position.
06 Aug 08
1 edit
Hi
Black should not have touched the Bishop.
7...e5 start making waves in the centre was far better.
(Infact anything but taking the Bishop was far batter).
Nice game but if I may chip in.
You had a chance to get your Queen to h5 with tempo.
OK it it does not matter here, but in another game it may.
(it's one move longer but you have to see the idea).
This tempo gaining ploy is worth knowing and it crops up quite
often, you will use it in future games.
06 Aug 08
Originally posted by greenpawn34Nice one. I think that Reinfeld has something very similar in "The Complete Chess Player." Which I'm reading now. .... Sadly, I would not have seen it were it not for your post. ... I'm sure such tactics are in loads of other books too of course.
Hi
Black should not have touched the Bishop.
7...e5 start making waves in the centre was far better.
(Infact anything but taking the Bishop was far batter).
Nice game but if I may chip in.
You had a chance to get your Queen to h5 with tempo.
OK it it does not matter here, but in another game it may.
(it's one move longer but you have to see t ...[text shortened]... po gaining ploy is worth knowing and it crops up quite
often, you will use it in future games.
Thanks GP.
07 Aug 08
Originally posted by greenpawn34Nice. I wouldn't have seen this in a game either. Almost every introductory and intermediate chess book I have read gives the point values of the pieces as one of the first strategic ideas. What this did with me was create an almost overwhelming materialism where the thought of giving up material doesn't have a chance. I am aware of this mindset I started out with and am working to reduce it. My point is that the heavy emphasis of introductory texts on the point value of pieces seems to hinder seeing ideas like the one you present.
This tempo gaining ploy is worth knowing and it crops up quite
often, you will use it in future games.
07 Aug 08
Originally posted by DeeceA book worth anything should also emphasize the value of sound sacrifices though.
Nice. I wouldn't have seen this in a game either. Almost every introductory and intermediate chess book I have read gives the point values of the pieces as one of the first strategic ideas. What this did with me was create an almost overwhelming materialism where the thought of giving up material doesn't have a chance. I am aware of this mindset I started out ...[text shortened]... tory texts on the point value of pieces seems to hinder seeing ideas like the one you present.
I know what you mean though....I still deal with the block of not considering moves because I'm loath to lose material. I'm working on healing that buy playing sacs with a carefree attitude of come what may.