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

Only Chess Forum

  1. 08 Mar '12 19:37 / 3 edits
    Now and again I'll chuck the gauntlet down at somebody with a considerably higher rating. Thanks to Sonhouse for putting up with me this time.

    I like to think that I can learn from playing experienced players, but on this occasion I'm really struggling to see the turning point of where things went sour. If Sonhouse or anybody else could kindly point out the foundation of my downfall, I'd be most grateful!

    The opening wasn't to plan, had to shuffle the Knight around a little, and obviously the last move cost me the mate - but I think I'd decided the game was his by that point.

  2. 08 Mar '12 19:38 / 1 edit
    Delete me (sorry)
  3. 08 Mar '12 20:48 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by DR85
    Now and again I'll chuck the gauntlet down at somebody with a considerably higher rating. Thanks to Sonhouse for putting up with me this time.

    I like to think that I can learn from playing experienced players, but on this occasion I'm really struggling to see the turning point of where things went sour. If Sonhouse or anybody else could kindly point out the Qg4h5 Qd8d7 28. Rg1h1 Qd7f5 29. Kc2b3 Qf5h7 30. Qh5xh7 1-0[/pgn]
    First of all - you did not have to give up your knight on c2 with 18...Bxf3+. You needed to open position in center as soon as possible to expose opponent`s king. Probably 18...d6 was the best.

    Also I don`t like how did you opened h-file with 19...Bxh4 - it was like asking him "attack me". 20...Bxf2 was another needless & greedy move giving your opponent time for mobilisation.

    Your decisive mistake was 25...a5?? which I find really pointless. Trying to exchange Queens with 25...Qc8 was much better.
  4. 09 Mar '12 01:38 / 4 edits
    You had a draw.


    Instead of playing 13...Nb3 dropping the c-pawn.
    The White Queen is short of free squares.



    Edit:
    Had a look at what Pacifique said: that looks good. You had no need to give up
    the Knight. You were better there.
  5. 09 Mar '12 13:15
    Thanks both, in honesty d6 hadn't occured to me at any point as being viable, I think I can learn something here. I did however see the repetition draw, but I've never liked this method, perhaps I should be more ruthless.
  6. 09 Mar '12 13:29
    Originally posted by DR85
    Thanks both, in honesty d6 hadn't occured to me at any point as being viable, I think I can learn something here. I did however see the repetition draw, but I've never liked this method, perhaps I should be more ruthless.
    You should not have to take draw of course. Having extra Rook is much better. 😉
  7. 09 Mar '12 13:57 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Pacifique
    You should not have to take draw of course. Having extra Rook is much better. 😉
    Yes, my thinking exactly! I thought it was a great start against a player with a high rating. If you have time, could you demonstrate how you believe 18. d6 would change the end game? I'm struggling to understand the move. Thanks 🙂
  8. 09 Mar '12 14:13 / 1 edit
    Yes taking and holding onto the extra piece was better than
    taking the draw.

    But you are only looking ahead in the game.

    I see a thread called; "Should I have taken the draw?"
    Where you take the perpetual and pocket the grading points.

    Then a new debate about grading points v playing chess would surface.
    (much better than looking at opposite coloured Bishop endings) 😉

    In that thread a newcomer appears, a girl, she supports your move, you
    get chatting, you fall in love, get married and have 6 children and a dog
    called Rosie.

    This was an important crossroads in your life DR85. You should have taken the perpetual.

    🙂
  9. 09 Mar '12 14:50
    Originally posted by DR85
    Yes, my thinking exactly! I thought it was a great start against a player with a high rating. If you have time, could you demonstrate how you believe 18. d6 would change the end game? I'm struggling to understand the move. Thanks 🙂
    18...d6

    1) attacks center - if opponent`s King is in center you should try to attack there, if practicable.
    2) creates threat to win pawn after 19...dxe5, as 20.Nxe5? fails to 20...Nxd4 21.exd4 Qxd4+.
    2) forces exchange of at least one pawn - it `s usually better to exchange as more as possible when you have extra material.
  10. 15 Mar '12 22:32 / 7 edits
    I think the draw against a stronger player via the perpetual attack on the Q is enticing. Yet, the ...d6 move depicted below does look good. White to move. White's options may include exd6, Bf4, Nd2, etc.



    As black I would leave the B at e4 where it is at (diagram above), supporting the annoying N at c2. If I had to retreat that B, I would retreat to f5 (diagram below), maintaining support of the N, and not doing Bxf3 (which would lose support of the N and also open the g-file on the black K).

    I possibly understand black's desire to exchange material with Bxf3, but I think this is a case for black to instead maintain complexity, and also to not think about about grabbing the white h4 pawn for reasons mention in earlier posts.

    Below instead of ...Bxf3, black instead retreat Bf5 in reply to white Nd2, for example. White to move.



    I don't see an easy way for white to pick up the black N at c2. Moreover while the black N has no mobility, it does prevent the white Re1 if white so desired though he may want to leave his lone R facing the black castled king. In any case, black is a rook to two pawns up.