16 Jul 12
I had played over 1900 games (mostly flank openings or 1. d4) on the site without EVER having a game ending in checkmate in 20 moves or less for the "Checkmate in under 20 moves" thread.
Since I started playing 1. e4, I have had two in the last 6 weeks or so.
I'm not exactly sure how to interpret that, but I thought it interesting enough to share.
16 Jul 12
2 edits
Originally posted by greenpawn34I did not see it at all. It's a good example of why I have switched to 1. e4. I am not as sharp as I need to be if I want to improve.
Hi Paul.
Why did you not play 9.Bb5 in that game you just posted in the under 20 thread.
It was the perfect move after Black refused all those Queen swaps you were offering.
[pgn]
1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Qxd5 3. Nc3 Qe5+ 4. Qe2 Qc5 5. d4 Qa5 6. Nf3 Bg4 7. Qe5 Qb6 8. Nd5 Qc6 {White now played 9.Nxc7+ but...} 9. Bb5 {wins the Queen.}[/pgn]
Psychologically, the Scandinavian makes me very uncomfortable, so in the game I aimed for efficient development.
I also tried to gain time on his queen by giving him the choice of trading off his only developed piece, or wasting time moving it again.
I think I became fixated on the weakness of c7 and the tactics surrounding it (a theme I have picked up recently from studying the Scotch), and my tunnel vision blinded me to other opportunities.
Your note confirms to me that I still have another hole in my tactical vision involving bishops on b4/b5 and g4/g5. You may not remember, but I posted an OTB game about 6 months ago where I had the opportunity to win a piece this way, and missed it completely.
This is another great example of how other people can really help when they look at your games. Thanks!