I blundered again last night in a quickplay game (that's not that quick just quicker than the 2 alternatives in our league at 30 moves in 60 mins and all the rest in 20 mins). After move 11 I had a significant time advantage having only used 12 mins to his 30 mins! However to my horror I saw that I had blundered and was about to loss my e pawn for no material compensation in a few moves, but made my mind up to tighten up the game, accept the pawn loss and try and close up the game so he would hopefully make an error due to his serious time disadvantage. Even though he had used up more time than me, he still took nearly 10 mins get to move 14 when he should have captured my e pawn, but blundered playing NH5?? which really confused me, so I took an extra couple of mins to check that I wasn't walking into a trap. But my question is does anyone know of a relationship between time and material advantage, even though I was expecting to go a pawn down I wasn't too disheartened because of our relative times on the clock, but maybe I was deluding myself? But he had to win in 40 mins and I had over 65 mins, I know that's a lot of time but at some point the 25 min advantage I had would start to worry him, I thought because he had been moving very slowly up to that point. Actually after the game he told me he had offered me quickplay in error, he had meant to offer adjudication or adjournment, so he actually blundered before his first move.
I would myself prefer to be better on board...especially if I can keep the game simple...as any simple game in which I am better I should be able to win in less than 15 minutes...
time vs advantage can not be evaluated without relation to specific position...
Originally posted by vipiu I would myself prefer to be better on board...especially if I can keep the game simple...as any simple game in which I am better I should be able to win in less than 15 minutes...
time vs advantage can not be evaluated without relation to specific position...
Yes that's what I thought but I couldn't post the position, and I thought it would be too much trouble for players to go through my moves but for anyone that wants to make the effort here they are:
Originally posted by stevetodd Yes that's what I thought but I couldn't post the position, and I thought it would be too much trouble for players to go through my moves but for anyone that wants to make the effort here they are:
1.c4 f5 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 e6 4.Nf3 Bb4 5.Bd2 0–0 6.a3 Be7 7.e3 c5 8.Bd3 b6 9.0–0 Bb7 10.Re1 Na6 11.e4 cxd4 12.Nxd4 Nc5 13.Qc2 Nxd3 14.Qxd3 Nh5 15.Qe2 g6 16.exf5 ...[text shortened]... n your comment about winning in 15 mins don't forget my opponent was playing extremely slowly
also depends on opponent rating...if opponent is 200 points higher I would just play fast a couple of moves more without much hope...if he is 200 points lower I would try to resist as hard is possible and give him a tough game...
Did you know his strength before the game ?
I am wandering what was in your opponent head when he played Nh5 🙂)...as he should have seen he can pick up e4 pawn with no compensation for u...
Originally posted by vipiu also depends on opponent rating...if opponent is 200 points higher I would just play fast a couple of moves more without much hope...if he is 200 points lower I would try to resist as hard is possible and give him a tough game...
Did you know his strength before the game ?
I am wandering what was in your opponent head when he played Nh5 🙂)...as he should have seen he can pick up e4 pawn with no compensation for u...
I know I nearly fell out of my chair, not only did he not take the pawn but he sat for at least 3 mins thinking about that knight move! I was thinking all that time, what on earth can he be thinking of, I even checked my clock to make sure that I had hit it.
I had been thinking in his time all of the match and for that 3 mins that he took I was calming myself thinking, ok you are going to go a pawn behind and was telling myself to stay calm and that although the position is poor, I do have some time advantage and was planning my next move based on the pawn capture. I forced myself not to react too quickly, and looked for some complicated tactics, but obvioulsy was thinking it's game over now because he is under pressure not just in material and tempo but hopelessly behind on the clock. Which as you can see got to him because he just fell apart after losing the knight, but although they were better moves for him, once I won the knight the game was over really.
Originally posted by stevetodd I blundered again last night in a quickplay game (that's not that quick just quicker than the 2 alternatives in our league at 30 moves in 60 mins and all the rest in 20 mins). After move 11 I had a significant time advantage having only used 12 mins to his 30 mins! However to my horror I saw that I had blundered and was about to loss my e pawn for no mater ...[text shortened]... meant to offer adjudication or adjournment, so he actually blundered before his first move.
Sorry I've just realized how ridicleous my question was, obvioulsy it depends so much on who you are actually playing
Originally posted by stevetodd Sorry I've just realized how ridicleous my question was, obvioulsy it depends so much on who you are actually playing
I think it's a very interesting topic anyway. I like the many dimensions of chess. if you force it enough, you can come to some kind of philosophy from it. I'd like to think of time in chess in terms of initiative, or being able to stop the attack before it materializes, or that kind of "in the board" thing, and yes, really, it (time) exists in the board, but there actually is a different kind of "time", which we use more in everyday life, outside the board, still influencing it. I don't know if this post looks stupid (and my english is too weak to make myself clear), but I enjoy a lot thinking about this kind of stuff.
Time v material and/or positional advantage
19 Oct '07 11:361 edit
Back to Top