The “From Gambit” Challenge.

don't worry I know enough about the froms to beat ya down, lol

I played tmetzler against the bird before Game 974981 but I am sure he's improved since then

From gambit? Hmmm... Nah... I don't use that opening and I don't believe in its soundness...

Originally posted by Samdogg
I played tmetzler against the bird before Game 974981 but I am sure he's improved since then

So all I have to do is last > 9 moves to be better than a 7th grader?

I'm gonna put a choke collar on you doggie-boy.

--tmetzler

Originally posted by tmetzler
So all I have to do is last > 9 moves to be better than a 7th grader?

I'm gonna put a choke collar on you doggie-boy.

--tmetzler

lol I beat you before I can beat ya again.

And we have our final soon-to-be victim...

benkoboy: Game 1088572

That makes 10 future losses for the From Gambit...

Good luck to all of you, you are gonna need it.

--tmetzler

...and the first loss: Game 1085608

twas a silly blunder, so i have asked for a rematch 😳

Originally posted by Ouermyhte
first of the Froms, expect black to be minced in whirling death blades
Game 1085608

*superfluous*

The powerful over-miter looked away, but for a moment and lost his queen in one of his own whirling meat-cutters. The From Gambit is not very forgiving.

The rematch has been sent: Game 1089773

We now stand at 1-0, The Bird has "displayed" its plumage...

--tmetzler

No more trash talk, hmmm something must not be going right in his games. lol

Originally posted by Samdogg
No more trash talk, hmmm something must not be going right in his games. lol

I don't know about that...

I was waiting to finish off a couple of them; Rather than discussing games in progress BUT, I'd say I've got the edge in a few. ie: I've got you on the run don't I. 🙂

Ravello and BuffaloBill have brought it hard...Gotta take my time with these games.

--tmetzler

Well leave it to the Ravello "The Rude" to be the first to put me in my place. I must blame the heavy use of drugs or heavy work schedule; how else can I explain why I announced to him that I thought I had his queen on move 22.

Well done ravello...Game 1085632

If anybody out there wants to post any ANALysis of the game, feel free. Otherwise I might do it later in the day.

Edit: I must say, he came with a particularly nasty attack on move 14..

--tmetzler

The challenge now stands at 1-1...

Originally posted by tmetzler
Well leave it to the Ravello "The Rude" to be the first to put me in my place. I must blame the heavy use of drugs or heavy work schedule; how else can I explain why I announced to him that I thought I had his queen on move 22.

Well done ravello...Game 1085632

If anybody out there wants to post any ANALysis of the game, feel free. Otherwis ...[text shortened]... h a particularly nasty attack on move 14..

--tmetzler

The challenge now stands at 1-1...

alalysis is an odd word..especially as the affix 'lysis' is to do with splitting. so...ass splitting.

Well,I enjoyed my game against tim,and for once I believe I didn't make any great mistakes,but hey, our record is still favorable to him leading with 10w-4d-6l.............
By the way I think the key of this last game has been his 20th move,capturing the bishop with the pawn instead of using the knight.
This allowed me to capture the d pawn and putting the queen in the center of action,while his was lying inactive in b3;then on move 22 he announced my queen's death with Ne4(???) but got punished losing another pawn and letting the game slide into my way...............this is the final position:

Is this enough tim?😉

While my 20th and 22nd were definitely the game-ending blunders..

I thought the move that began my eventually downfall was: 11. Bg5.
I should have traded off that knight immediately:
11. Nf3xNe5 Bd6xNe5 12. d4 Bd5?


22. the funny thing is, you know I double-checked it (triple-checked it) before I announced that I thought "I had your queen". I did force myself to laugh about it...

--tmetzler

The eagle has landed. The bird has been plucked and roasted.
Game 1085659 Just some thoughts on my reasoning here:

In this game, I really didn’t like the King side pawn structure, so I was determined to castle Queen side. As a result I got into a horrible tangle with a very cramped position. The consequence was that I had to give up a knight (rather that than a bishop). In hindsight, though, losing the knight was actually beneficial in that it opened up my position. This position was also helped along nicely by
15 Qe1? enabling Black to exchange a bishop for a rook.
17 ... Rd1! was neat – it pinned a knight, bishop and rook. (How many times do you see that?) With the other White knight out of the action on the King side, Black now had all the play despite a slight material disadvantage.
19. Kf2? – a mistake for reasons we’ll see now.
20 ... Bc1! I think it’s a masterstroke. I was initially attracted to this move because we were heading into a very open endgame and I desperately needed to exchange a bishop otherwise his twin bishops would have killed me. However, I then saw it also enabled ...
21 ... Rf8ch! – now I can take my pick of bishops, bring my rooks together on the 1st rank, recover material plus more and head into a winning endgame.
28. Ph3? Huh? Maybe the T-man has lost concentration. He might as well resign now. I’ve got a passed pawn on the King side, a one pawn advantage on the Queen side and a rook/knight vs knight/knight. If I swap knights (as happens) the remaining knight can’t be everywhere while the rook extends its sphere of influence over the whole board.
31. Kg1. No problem. Swap knights, pin the King on the 1st rank and advance my Queen side pawns. The backup is the other passed pawn on the King side. Ignore the passed pawn for now because White can’t be everywhere.

I guess the From could be a useful tool in the hands of an expert, but I’ll steer clear of it, thanks. Interesting game and thanks for this learning opportunity Mr Metzler.