in my decision to attack so early?
Game 7821485
I knew the last move failed but what did i do wrong before that? 11.Rd1 seems like it might have been better in hindsight but not by much.
Your position is pretty bad already after 6.f4 IMO. That move really makes no sense... This is the main line of the Morra:
I'm not asking you to memorize it... Just notice how white develops his pieces in a manner consistent with sacrificing the d-pawn. The rooks go on the open c and d-files. The point is to play where your advantage lies. The way you played it makes no sense. The c and d-files you sacrificed a pawn for were irrelevant. And the knight thats development was accelerated never even moved from c3.
White really doesn't have time for a move like f4 in the Morra, at least not that early in the game. You've sacrificed a pawn, which some players might attach a bit of value to, you need to get your pieces out ASAPly. Also you're going to want to castle kingside and f4 can make that kind of a chore.
There were other moves that made no sense. You followed up with 7.f5 for example. Why play f5 if you have no intention of taking on e6? I mean I think it's a bad move in the first place but you really need to make an effort to fit every move into a coherent attacking scheme. You played f5 and then put a bishop behind it? Why? The bishop is shooting into empty space and blocking lines towards f7.
You need to play more consistently and directly if you're looking for an opportunity to attack so early in the game.
IF you're going to play f5 the only logical way to follow up is some combination of Nf3, 0-0, and Bg5. Something like this:
Of course others can point out the tactical shots you missed, and of course, tactics are king. I just thought I'd throw my 2 cents your way...
Originally posted by DivGradCurlI have played the morra for a while and i know the ideas behind it. I just wanted to throw my opponent off. The idea behind the pawn rush to f5 is to open a file and a diagonal towards f7. Putting the bishop behind the pawn was to threaten the c7 square which worked as he wasted time with a6 so I could play e5 and be way ahead in development. After blacks ninth move is what i'm really worried about.
Your position is pretty bad already after 6.f4 IMO. That move really makes no sense... This is the main line of the Morra:
[pgn]
1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 Nc6 5.Nf3 d6 6.Bc4 e6 7.0-0 Nf6 8.Qe2 Be7 9.Rd1 e5 10.h3 0-0 11.Be3 Be6 12.Bxe6 fxe6 13.Rac1
[/pgn]
I'm not asking you to memorize it... Just notice how white develops his pieces in a issed, and of course, tactics are king. I just thought I'd throw my 2 cents your way...
Originally posted by tomtom232I don't understand your philosophy of, "throwing my opponent off." Playing a bad move isn't throwing anyone off. Maybe in blitz.
I have played the morra for a while and i know the ideas behind it. I just wanted to throw my opponent off. The idea behind the pawn rush to f5 is to open a file and a diagonal towards f7. Putting the bishop behind the pawn was to threaten the c7 square which worked as he wasted time with a6 so I could play e5 and be way ahead in development. After blacks ninth move is what i'm really worried about.
Just a quick story... A couple weeks ago I decided to give Alekhine's Defense a try. My first opponent played 2.Nc3 and we transposed into a Vienna. My second opponent played 2.Nc3 and we transposed into a Four Knights. My third opponent played 2.Bc4 and we transposed into a Bishop's Opening. I quickly realized all my opponents were trying to "throw me off". Personally I was extremely pleased with their decisions to sacrifice most of their first move advantage, and now I actually know the theory of the Four Knights 10x better than I know any Alekhine theory. I made it out of the opening comfortably in each case.
You said the idea behind f5 was to, "open a file and a diagonal towards f7." I'm with you on that. Unfortunately you did not follow up on your idea, and that was my point. A rook never made it to the f-file... And even if it did, there was a bishop in the way!
Also I don't understand why you would think forcing him to play a6 wasted any of his time. You've wasted your own time moving your bishop to a benign square. Now you're going to have to waste more time repositioning it... His position was extremely solid, and a6 certainly didn't compromise it.
You asked if your attack was too early. IMO yes it was. Your position wasn't coordinated well enough to justify an attack.
Originally posted by DivGradCurlwell, like i said I was going after a bigger lead in development and the bishop is just taking a breather on that square to acomplish this before it moves on or sacs itself.
I don't understand your philosophy of, "throwing my opponent off." Playing a bad move isn't throwing anyone off. Maybe in blitz.
Just a quick story... A couple weeks ago I decided to give Alekhine's Defense a try. My first opponent played 2.Nc3 and we transposed into a Vienna. My second opponent played 2.Nc3 and we transposed into a Four Knights. My t ...[text shortened]... O yes it was. Your position wasn't coordinated well enough to justify an attack.
Anyway,Thats what I was thinking instead of Qg4 I was going to play Nf3 and 0-0, I just have a bad habit of changing at the last instant and my main problem is that I'm trying to change the way I think and evaluate and I just am not efficient at it yet.
Your examples of transposition are irrelevent though since f4 in the morra doesn't really transpose to anything he has no experience to go off.
Thanks for the input. 🙂
Opening seemed to work ok, after 9 moves you had a lead in development and space (although not in solidity) which could justify a pawn. A simple nf3 might have been better although that sacs a further pawn.
I think you know that trying to attack too early and having your bishop and queen chased around was a problem.
I think you were doing fine up to your eleventh move. Black was playing passively and deserved to be punished. But 11 0-0-0 is too slow. I like the look of 11 f6, for example:
11 f6 gxf4
12 fxe7 Ngxe7
13 Nf3 Rg8
14 Qxf4
White has better development, strong pressure on the f-file and Black's dark squares, and he can castle on either wing to bring the rooks into play, all for a mere pawn.
Hi TomTom.
Think 6.f4 is worth a punt not fond of 7.f5 though. Too early.
After 6.f4 plan is to play Nf3 and 0-0 get Rook behind f-pawn.
In the mainline you lost a tempo with f4 but you are getting that back
because you are not playing Rfd1. (that is the optimistic approach).
Can see Black playing a quick d5 then you go e5.
Similiar to French Defence but you have no d-pawn.
(that means you have square d4 for a piece...optimitic approach again) 😉
Hi all. I'm not too good at this but instead of 11...h5 why not 11...gxf4 12.Qg7 Bf6 13.exf6 Qxf6 where it seems white is out of steam?
Edit: I just checked. 11...h5 is actually best. My offered move of 11...gxf4 is 3rd best but still wins.
So, tomtom as you can see, the bishop was never taboo.
Hi TomTom.
Looking for something else and just checked my DB.
6.f4 was played OTB by Andrew Martin...that's good company to keep.
He won and he did play e5 and was it was a French/Caro Khan type game.
(Black got to play c5 twice!).
I'd say Black was doing OK but he lost.
Nothing to do with opening Black lost it in the middle game.
I say Black lost it because he does look OK.
Mind you OTB v Martin looking OK and winning is two different things.
Nobody on RHP has played 6.f4. The developing 6.Nf3 is the move usually chosen.
DB has other 6.f4's but results go with Black.
A.Martin - D.Cummings, Lloyds Bank, 1979
Originally posted by Goshen11...gxf4 12. fxe6 fxe6 13.Qh5+ Kf8 14.Bxe6
Hi all. I'm not too good at this but instead of 11...h5 why not 11...gxf4 12.Qg7 Bf6 13.exf6 Qxf6 where it seems white is out of steam?
Edit: I just checked. 11...h5 is actually best. My offered move of 11...gxf4 is 3rd best but still wins.
So, tomtom as you can see, the bishop was never taboo.