While the majority of the chess world is looking over the games of Anand and Topalov, I'd like to share one of mine from a disappointing weekend congress. I took the half point bye on Friday and lost 2 games horribly on Saturday. On Sunday I won a Caro-Kann where I inaccurately sacrificed a bishop for 3 pawns although my opponent didn't see how to refute it and lost in the endgame. My last game, however, has a bit more to it. I blundered the exchange reasonably early on (I blundered a lot this weekend) but fought back to grab some pawns. Some of the people who'd come from Bristol had a good chuckle saying I'd only been lucky to get away with it, but later analysis seems to show that my play was entirely sound.
You donated the exchange and then he goes 27 Kh3. Why didn't he play 27 f5 I didn't look at the whole game critically but it looks like losers chess or some variant where you make eye-raising moves and your opponent obliges. 😀
Originally posted by enrico20 You donated the exchange and then he goes 27 Kh3. Why didn't he play 27 f5 I didn't look at the whole game critically but it looks like losers chess or some variant where you make eye-raising moves and your opponent obliges. 😀
27. f5 fails pretty dramatically to the cheeky 27. ... Ng4+.
Sadly though, you and Dale have hit the nail on the head. I had ommitted the 3rd option; Q. Was I lucky or resourceful? A. You were both crap.
Originally posted by Meadows 27. f5 fails pretty dramatically to the cheeky 27. ... Ng4+.
Sadly though, you and Dale have hit the nail on the head. I had ommitted the 3rd option; Q. Was I lucky or resourceful? A. You were both crap.
White could have launched a nice attack with 24. f4 comfortably an exchange up. Even if the game followed what was played then 26 f3 preventing you taking his pawns was good for white while preparing the attack.
I wouldn't say you were both crap, just played lots of mistakes.
Lucky v Resourceful
10 May '10 13:36
Back to Top