Do you change your style of play if you must win a game in order to stay in a tournament? If so, what do you do differently?
The following game was a "must win" for me. Game 2230968 I was uncertain about what to do on move 31.
I noticed 31...Nf2, which I believe forces 32.Qxf2 Nd3 resulting in a K+Q+5P vs. K+Q+4P endgame--although I liked the fact that there seemed to be a few very nice pitfalls for my opponent in this line, I was concerned that if he played it correctly then this endgame would be tough to win.
I also noticed, and ultimately chose 31...Nd3, forcing 32.Qxd6 cxd6 and a K+2N+5P vs. K+R+4P endgame. This turned out to be good for me, because I believe my opponent's next move was a blunder, however, I am not sure if this was really sufficient material to ensure a win.
Was 31...Nd3 good? Would I have been better to keep the pieces on the board and play for a larger endgame advantage? I didn't see another obvious way to continue, but perhaps I just missed it. How much of an endgame advantage do you think is necessary in a "must win" situation?
Originally posted by leisurelyslothYah, Qd3+
Was 31...Nd3 good? Would I have been better to keep the pieces on the board and play for a larger endgame advantage? I didn't see another obvious way to continue, but perhaps I just missed it. How much of an endgame advantage do you think is necessary in a "must win" situation?
Originally posted by leisurelyslothIf I must win, instead of my slow, leisurely style, I become aggressive, taking risks I would not normally take, opening up the game for tactical oppurtunities... I play contrary to my regular style.
Do you change your style of play if you [b]must win a game in order to stay in a tournament? If so, what do you do differently?
The following game was a "must win" for me. Game 2230968 I was uncertain about what to do on move 31.
I noticed 31...Nf2, which I believe forces 32.Qxf2 Nd3 resulting in a K+Q+5P vs. K+Q+4P endgame--although ...[text shortened]... it. How much of an endgame advantage do you think is necessary in a "must win" situation?[/b]
Originally posted by chesskid001... and lose.
If I must win, instead of my slow, leisurely style, I become aggressive, taking risks I would not normally take, opening up the game for tactical oppurtunities... I play contrary to my regular style.
If you must win stick with what you know only take more care which here means spending more time analysing your moves. Don't move too quickly and analyse thoroughly.
The best example of a "must win" game has to be the last game of the 1987 World Championship match between Kasparov and Karpov.
Kasparov was a point down and so had to win the last game to draw the match and retain his title.
So, what did Garry do - Did he play the King's Gambit? The Blackmar Diemer? The Goring Gambit? Maybe the Grob?
No...
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1067242
If Karpov had drawn just this one game I believe that he would have been considered the greatest player of all time.
Originally posted by Fat LadyThis one's pretty good as well. Kramnik v Leko in the 2004 WC match. The same situation - Kramnik needed to win to tie the match and retain the title:
The best example of a "must win" game has to be the last game of the 1987 World Championship match between Kasparov and Karpov.
Kasparov was a point down and so had to win the last game to draw the match and retain his title.
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1311652