|
A few years ago, someone in LF posted an account of a chess competition that went awry. A player hired a sorcerer/warlock to stand by his side and glare at his opponent and cast spells and stuff. The players then got in a big fight over whether magic and recruiting magicians was against the rules in chess. For the life of me, I can't find it anywhere online. Any help?
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2013 04:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 23:20 |
|
|
Anyone want to play a game? I was an 1800 player before I quit tournaments about 10 years ago, and am at 2000+ on chess.com because I've been diligent about not timing out... chess.com username: time4lunch
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2013 09:42
|
|
|
itstime4lunch posted:Anyone want to play a game? I was an 1800 player before I quit tournaments about 10 years ago, and am at 2000+ on chess.com because I've been diligent about not timing out... Sure -- I'll send you a match invite through the website.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2013 15:30
|
|
|
Match started. Anyone else?
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2013 15:48
|
|
|
Oh man, I'm glad I finally found this thread. I've been on chess kick for a month now. I've been playing on chess.com as Jonked. I've been trying to not freak out about my rating, but it felt lovely dropping down to 900s after an early high of 1300s, but I'm slowly working back up. It doesn't help that a few good games I had a few good games where my opponent timed out just as I was starting to solidify a good middle game position... And a couple dumb mistakes that lost me a game. I've been working back up though, and I should break 1100 at the end of the current game I'm playing. I've been reading books on building my opening repertoire, and doing tactic puzzles to build up my middle and end games, but... The advice I keep reading is to study your middle and end games, but I don't really know how to do that beyond what I'm doing now and playing more games
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2013 18:00
|
|
|
Jonked posted:I've been reading books on building my opening repertoire, and doing tactic puzzles to build up my middle and end games, but... The advice I keep reading is to study your middle and end games, but I don't really know how to do that beyond what I'm doing now and playing more games It sounds like you're a beginner, or at least you've never taken the game seriously before this? For endgames, start off by learning to checkmate with a lone King and Queen or King and Rook against a King; then how to Queen a single Pawn/stop it from being Queened. You should be able to do all these flawlessly with both hemispheres tied behind your head. There are decent tutorials for all of them on YouTube (let me know if you can't find them) and there's a site here where you can practice them against a computer. (Don't worry about all the other ones on there; some are very advanced, and few if any are really appropriate for you to worry about.) These are important so that you have a clear path toward winning a won game. Beginners often have problems: they'll be up a piece but that isn't enough, they feel--perhaps correctly--they need two extra Queens or something ridiculous. And so, where a good player would calmly trade material until there's nothing left but one Pawn in a position to Queen (or if the opponent refused to allow these trades, they'd use the threat to bully the opponent around), the beginners continue attacking recklessly in an effort to expand their advantage, and wind up making mistakes or even stalemating with their two Queens. Don't worry about opening repertoire (although basic opening principles are a different story). You can memorize a few moves but ideally you should just never play a move you don't understand. Look at it this way: most published lines drop you off at a position that's basically equal (or so close that only a high level player could tell the difference). But you start off in a position that's basically equal. So, what a waste of time learning all this stuff! Strong players use opening theory; they learn the strategic principles that apply in one specific opening, hoping they'll have a better understanding than their opponent. But before you do that, you need to learn the strategic principles that apply to all games. If you were learning to be a general, what would you learn first: the strategic ins and outs of one particular battlefield, or how to command an army? Of course the latter is better, even if you could reliably lure all your enemies to that precise battleground and keep the battle from flowing outside its bounds. (Which you can't.) If you're interested in a book recommendation, I always recommend Lev Alburt's Comprehensive Chess Course, Vol. 2. (Vol. I is just the rules.) This contains the endgames I talked about (and maybe more, I forget) along with everything else you could want from a first book. Unfortunately I can't think of any good online resources for basic middlegame strategy, if you're not up for buying the book. Then, the free ebook at https://www.chesstactics.org is absolutely fantastic and covers basic tactics in nauseating detail; it's worth reading every page if you have the time, or skimming if you can't. Silman's Endgame Course is great too for continuing beyond the bare-bones endgames I outlined, but should probably wait until you're finished with the other two books (which could be quite a long time if you really try to soak the material in). McNerd fucked around with this message at 15:47 on Jul 29, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 15:27
|
|
|
That's a really helpful write up -- thanks for posting that. I've been working on those endgames but need to keep practicing those. Need to crack open the Alburt book, too. Do you think there's value in studying computer analyses of your games, for someone just starting to take the game seriously (the point I'm at)? I've had chess.com run analysis on a few of my games, but I haven't really looked closely at them yet. At a glance they seem to confirm what I suspect, which is that I've got blunders and missed moves all over the place, but I'm not sure if there's some most productive way to make use of the analysis, or even if it is productive at this point. Maybe the time I can devote to the game is better spent elsewhere, like on your points above.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 16:03
|
|
|
Regularly analyzing your games is absolutely a good use of your time. Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it. That said, computer analysis is only one tool for analyzing your games: it's good, but what's even more important is going back through the game move by move and figuring out how your plans went right/wrong. It's also worth asking a better player's opinion now and then. You can always post a game on here or elsewhere and ask for feedback. For best results, include at least some of your own analysis when you do this. (The more you share your thought process, the better others can critique it, and the more they'll spend their time discussing mistakes you haven't already figured out. Also for some people this seems to be an etiquette issue, like, why should we spend time thinking and writing about your game when you can't be bothered to?) Incidentally the engine at chess.com is not so good, I'm told? Although it might be sufficient for your purposes, and undoubtedly it's fine at basic blunder checking. Maybe someone else will chime in to suggest a good alternative? You don't want to use what I use. McNerd fucked around with this message at 17:31 on Jul 29, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 17:26
|
|
|
McNerd posted:Regularly analyzing your games is absolutely a good use of your time. Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it. That said, computer analysis is only one tool for analyzing your games: it's good, but what's even more important is going back through the game move by move and figuring out how your plans went right/wrong. Thanks again -- that's helpful advice. I'll take a look at the games I've got and spend some time replaying them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 18:38
|
|
|
Just went through and added everyone on the list in the OP to my friends list on chess.com. Zugzwang seems to have closed their account, though - are they still active and playing?
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2013 17:21
|
|
|
Anyone else playing in the Northeast Open this weekend? It'll be my first major multi-day tournament and I'm somewhat nervous (playing in the u2050). Honestly I'm just hoping to get playable positions out of the opening for all my games.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2013 12:25
|
|
|
Don't forget to press your advantages. You're in a section where even the best players can be relied upon to put themselves into worse positions, so don't make the mistake of assuming that they know what they're doing and they're going to find the right response. I've won my fair share of worse games as the 'better' player after my opponent decided to defend rather than attack. Also please post your games after.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2013 14:44
|
|
|
Wow. Svidler just blundered badly against Ushenina and resigned. e: oops wrong thread...
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2013 16:20
|
|
|
I think this should be in all future OPs: http://pogonina.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1990&Itemid=1&&lang=english quote:One of my favorite chess books as a teenager was Simon Webb’s insightful (and in some places provocative) “Chess for Tigers”. Webb discusses this situation under the heading “How to trap Heffalumps”. A natural reaction is to play cautiously and safe, hoping to cling to a draw. But Webb argues – and I tend to agree with him based on my own experience from both sides of this situation – that this approach is dangerous because one of the strengths of really strong players is excellent technique and accuracy in simple positions. In simple positions, strong players rarely lose control and basically get a free shot at the goal with no risk.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2013 10:35
|
|
|
Hmmm. That sounds like good advice. As a beginner I feel like I'm mostly trying to play it safe, and am usually considering safety as the primary factor when pondering any move (certainly early in a game). So it's often a struggle figuring out when to break out of that mindset. And it's apparent in games against stronger players that just playing it safe doesn't gain me any advantage, and usually leads me to a point where I'm trapped into choosing between bad options. I feel like itstime4lunch gave me a nice object lesson in that in our last game (which I've been meaning to analyze and post here with some thoughts and questions -- need to get working on that).
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2013 14:31
|
|
|
Here's an Alekhine defense I just played in my local club team tournament. Opening sort of morphed into a good french, and then I lost control of the game after I missed 19. b4, but I think I found decent compensation (although it looks like I chose one of the worse responses). 31. ...Nc4 looked bad aesthetically but I couldn't see how he would win the rook and I wanted to get more pieces off and make more passed queen-side pawns (Computer analysis later showed that this was a blunder). I was able to calculate all way the way to the end on move 34. Rd1, I knew he was angling to play Rd3 the next move so I spent 15 minutes calculating the endgame. Overall I'm really happy about how I played, although I'm sure there were a lot of positional mistakes (i.e. not really sure about my 12. Bd3 -> Ba6 maneuver). I'm black, my opponent was rated ~1850, time controls were the same as last week G/90 d5. [pgn] 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.Nf3 d6 4.Bc4 Nb6 5.Bb3 d5 6.h3 Bf5 7.d4 h6 8.c3 e6 9.0–0 c5 10.Be3 N8d7 11.a4 Rc8 12.Nbd2 Bd3 13.Re1 a5 14.Nf1 Ba6 15.dxc5 Nxc5 16.Bc2 Nc4 17.b4 Nb2 18.Qb1 Ncd3 19.b5 Nxe1 20.Qxe1 Bxb5 21.axb5 Nc4 22.b6 Bc5 23.Ba4+ Ke7 24.Bxc5+ Rxc5 25.Rb1 Nxb6 26.Bb3 Qc7 27.Ne3 a4 28.Ba2 Rxc3 29.Kh2 Rc8 30.g3 Ke8 31.Qe2 Nc4 32.Nxc4 dxc4 33.Kg2 Qc6 34.Rd1 b5 35.Rd6 Qxf3+ 36.Qxf3 Rxf3 37.Kxf3 c3 38.Rd1 c2 39.Rc1 b4 40.Ke3 b3 41.Bxb3 axb3 42.Kd2 Kd7 43.Ra1 b2 44.Ra7+ Ke8 0-1 [/pgn]
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2013 20:29
|
|
|
Jeez, I'm 0.5/3.0 so far and majorly tilted. Played a really nice nimzo indian against a 1950 and lost it due to a stupid decision and just played poorly the rest of the day. Had another won english game, and just couldn't covert the winning endgame, and I had the draw for my last game but I got sloppy and lost a clearly drawn opposite color bishop endgame. Hopefully tomorrow will be better. I'll post the games after it's over Edit: Ended up 2.5/5.0 after a horrible first day. Day 1 Game 1 Playing Black [pgn] 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Qc2 0–0 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.Qxc3 b6 7.Nf3 Bb7 8.e3 d6 9.Be2 Nbd7 10.0–0 c5 11.Rd1 cxd4 12.exd4 d5 13.Ne5 Rc8 14.Bg5 Nxe5 15.Bxf6 Qxf6 16.dxe5 Qg5 17.Qg3 Qxg3 18.hxg3 Rfd8 19.Rac1 d4 20.f4 f6 21.exf6 gxf6 22.Bf3 Ba6 23.b3 e5 24.Re1 Re8 25.Rcd1 Kf8 26.Bd5 Rc7 27.Kf2 b5 28.cxb5 Rc2+ 29.Kf3 Bxb5 30.Rc1 Be2+ 31.Kf2 Rxc1 32.Rxc1 d3 33.Rc7 Re7 34.Rxe7 Kxe7 35.fxe5 fxe5 36.Ke3 h6 37.Bf3 Kd6 38.Bxe2 dxe2 39.Kxe2 Kd5 40.Ke3 h5 41.Kd3 e4+ 42.Ke3 Ke5 43.b4 Kf5 44.a4 Kg4 45.b5 Kxg3 46.a5 Kxg2 47.b6 axb6 48.a6 1-0 [/pgn] Missed the e4+ intermediate move before the Be2+ move on move 30, which would have been winning and I messed up the counting when I think I could still have held a draw. Game 2 ~Against a 1780 Playing White. [pgn] 1. c4 Nf6 2. g3 g6 3. Bg2 Bg7 4. Nc3 O-O 5. d3 d6 6. Nh3 Nc6 7. Nf4 Rb8 8. O-O Bd7 9. h3 Qc8 10. Kh2 Nd4 11. Nfd5 Re8 12. Nxf6+ exf6 13. e3 Nc6 14. f4 Be6 15. e4 Nd4 16. Be3 f5 17. Qd2 Bd7 18. Rae1 c5 19. Nd5 Bc6 20. Bxd4 Bxd4 21. exf5 Rxe1 22. Rxe1 Bxd5 23. Bxd5 Qd7 24. fxg6 hxg6 25. Qe2 Bf6 26. b3 Kg7 27. Qf3 Rh8 28. g4 b6 29. Kg2 Qd8 30. Bc6 Bc3 31. Re2 Qf6 32. f5 Be5 33. Rf2 Bd4 34. Rf1 Be5 35. fxg6 Qxf3+ 36. Rxf3 fxg6 37. a3 Rf8 38. b4 Rxf3 39. Kxf3 Kf6 40. b5 Kg5 41. Be4 Bb2 42. a4 Bc1 43. h4+ Kxh4 44. Bxg6 Kg5 45. Bf5 Kf6 46. Ke4 Bd2 47. Kd5 Ke7 48. Kc6 Bf4 49. Kb7 Kd8 50. Kxa7 Kc7 51. Ka6 Bd2 52. g5 Bxg5 53. a5 bxa5 54. Kxa5 Kb8 55. Kb6 Bf4 56. Kc6 Bg3 57. Bd7 Bf4 58. Kd5 Bg3 59. Bc6 Bf4 60. Ke4 Be5 61. Kf3 Bh2 62. Ke4 Be5 63. Kd5 Bf4 64. b6 Be5 65. d4 Bxd4 66. Kxd6 Be3 67. Kd5 Bd4 68. Ke4 Bf2 1/2-1/2 [/pgn] Wow I missed the a5 push idea when my king was on Ka7 was at +9. Game 3, I was pretty much on tilt at this point, Game was pretty drawn after move 15 and just kept trying to go for broke and played badly. Against a ~1750 I'm black. [pgn] 1. e4 Nf6 2. Nc3 e5 3. Nf3 Nc6 4. d4 exd4 5. Nxd4 Bb4 6. Nxc6 bxc6 7. Bd3 O-O 8. O-O Re8 9. Re1 h6 10. Bd2 d5 11. exd5 cxd5 12. h3 a5 13. a3 Bc5 14. Qf3 c6 15. Rxe8+ Nxe8 16. Ne2 Qf6 17. Qxf6 Nxf6 18. Bc3 Ne4 19. Bxe4 dxe4 20. Rd1 Kf8 21. Nd4 Bb7 22. Nf5 f6 23. Nd4 Bb6 24. Ne6+ Ke7 25. Nxg7 Bc8 26. Nh5 f5 27. Bd4 Bc7 28. Be3 Be6 29. Nf4 Bf7 30. Ne2 Bh5 31. Re1 Be5 32. Bd4 Bxe2 33. Bxe5 Bc4 34. Bf4 h5 35. f3 Kf6 36. fxe4 fxe4 37. Rxe4 Bd5 38. Re2 Kf5 39. Bd2 a4 40. Bc3 Rg8 41. Bb4 Rg6 42. Kh2 Re6 43. Rxe6 Bxe6 44. Kg3 Bd5 45. Kf2 Be4 46. c3 Ke5 47. g3 Kd5 48. g4 hxg4 49. hxg4 c5 50. Ba5 Kc4 51. Ke3 Bg6 52. Kd2 Kb3 53. Kc1 c4 54. Bb4 Bh7 55. Kd2 Kxb2 56. g5 0-1 [/pgn] I'm still pissed about this game. Day 2 Game 4 Against a ~1700 Playing white with a bad English. [pgn] 1.c4 e5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 d5 4.cxd5 Nxd5 5.Nc3 Nb6 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.0–0 f6 8.d3 Be6 9.h3 Qd7 10.Kh2 0–0–0 11.Bd2 g5 12.Ne1 Kb8 13.Nc2 h5 14.Ne4 Qg7 15.b4 Be7 16.Nc5 Bxc5 17.bxc5 Nd5 18.e3 Nde7 19.Qe2 Qg6 20.Nb4 Nxb4 21.Bxb4 Qxd3 22.Qf3 Bd5 23.Qxf6 Nc6 24.Rfd1 Qc4 25.Bxd5 Qxb4 26.Bxc6 Rdf8 27.Qxe5 Rxf2+ 28.Bg2 Rhf8 29.Rab1 1-0 [/pgn] Got lucky with some unsound tactics. Game 5 Against a ~1800 Playing black, won a nice miniature [pgn] 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e5 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.Bc4 Nxe4 5.Nxe4 d5 6.Bb5 dxe4 7.Nxe5 Qf6 8.d4 exd3 9.Nxc6 bxc6 10.Bxd3 Bd6 11.Qe2+ Be6 12.Be4 0–0 13.0–0 Bd5 14.Qd3 Qh4 15.Re1 Rae8 16.g3 Rxe4 17.gxh4 Rxe1+ 18.Qf1 Bxh2+ 0-1 [/pgn] I'll post a detailed analysis with variations I calculated for my games if you guys think it would be helpful. Any thoughts or comments would be great. I guess the take home message for myself is to practice basic counting and endgames. singe fucked around with this message at 23:17 on Aug 19, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2013 01:56
|
|
|
That's probably my biggest problem - actually winning a won game. I'll have to post more detail to really explain it but right now I just moved and I'll have to dig up my other computer (posting from my laptop) for logs. It happens a lot more than I'd like to admit. I tend to be WAY too conservative when I have an advantage, and it tends to gently caress me. The strangest part is that I do this while always using the most aggressive opening I can find, and being almost too aggressive in the midgame (which also can gently caress me over).
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2013 03:22
|
|
|
McCoy Pauley, I've been having a lot of fun playing with you, but goddamn you're tough. Still, I felt like the ending was pretty close, and I could have pulled out the win if I hadn't made those blunders around move 13 through 17. Maybe game three will be different!
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2013 03:37
|
|
|
I'm prolecat on chess.com if anyone wants to play. Quit playing for a year or two, so been ramping back up over the last month or so.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2013 06:01
|
|
|
Jonked posted:McCoy Pauley, I've been having a lot of fun playing with you, but goddamn you're tough. Still, I felt like the ending was pretty close, and I could have pulled out the win if I hadn't made those blunders around move 13 through 17. Maybe game three will be different! Thanks -- I've been enjoying these games also. There was this point in the last one from about 20 to 25 where I thought I was going to get my king completely trapped in the corner, before we got back to threatening an exchange of queens. I need to sit down and take a look this last game and the one before, and post them with some thoughts. prolecat posted:I'm prolecat on chess.com if anyone wants to play. Quit playing for a year or two, so been ramping back up over the last month or so. I'll send you a match invite (mccoypauley on chess.com) McCoy Pauley fucked around with this message at 02:28 on Aug 22, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2013 02:26
|
|
|
So I was over on reddit checking out the r/chess subreddit. Why is everybody over there obsessed with chesstempo.com? I mean... it's just chess puzzles, aren't they? The endgame training is pretty useful, sure, but it doesn't really seem to be that spectacular. Yet I opened a half dozen threads at random, and at least half of them were people crowing over their chess tempo score. Am I missing something?
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2013 05:53
|
|
|
Jonked posted:So I was over on reddit checking out the r/chess subreddit. Why is everybody over there obsessed with chesstempo.com? I mean... it's just chess puzzles, aren't they? The endgame training is pretty useful, sure, but it doesn't really seem to be that spectacular. Yet I opened a half dozen threads at random, and at least half of them were people crowing over their chess tempo score. I wouldn't stress about rating there. There's really no point. It's more important to give yourself a reasonable amount of time per problem, know whether your answer is correct or not, and then play the right move or just pass it or make what you feel is the best move. Once you get into a higher rating bracket, or if you really want to solve a problem for some reason, it can be beneficial to actually study a problem that you don't know, but if you are sub 1600-1800 on chesstempo you are missing a ton of tactical ideas so it's probably better to just look through the solution and move on. Khorne fucked around with this message at 23:37 on Aug 26, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2013 23:28
|
|
|
I'm about to jet off to Italy for a vacation/tournament on the waterfront. Lev Aronian has just been announced as giving an opening address. Hopefully they manage to talk him into participating.singe posted:I'll post a detailed analysis with variations I calculated for my games if you guys think it would be helpful. Any thoughts or comments would be great. I guess the take home message for myself is to practice basic counting and endgames. I have been super duper busy and will continue to be for the forseeable future, but I promise that I will write something on your games by the end of September.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2013 17:24
|
|
|
I signed up as therapeutic8e8op on chess.com if anyone would like to play. I haven't played very many games ever and I only started really playing against a friend like a month ago, but Ive had tons of fun watching and reading about games if that makes sense.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2013 04:47
|
|
|
Hey, so I've recently started playing a lot more chess and trying to improve my game. I'd like to play against some better players who'll help me analyze and stuff. So, yeah, if that sounds fun to you, I'm Capuano on chess.com!
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2013 02:50
|
|
|
Capuano posted:Hey, so I've recently started playing a lot more chess and trying to improve my game. I'd like to play against some better players who'll help me analyze and stuff. So, yeah, if that sounds fun to you, I'm Capuano on chess.com! I'll send you a game invite through chess.com. I've slowed down a little in the time I was spending with the Chessmaster tutorials and tactics problems, and I need to get back to that. Probably should work on openings as well. But the main thing I'm realizing, after looking this morning at a move I made last night right before going to bed, is I need to stop making "just one more quick move" when I'm exhausted and not firing in all cylinders.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2013 14:22
|
|
|
singe posted:I'll post a detailed analysis with variations I calculated for my games if you guys think it would be helpful. Any thoughts or comments would be great. I guess the take home message for myself is to practice basic counting and endgames. As promised: Game 1 I really like your play in the early middlegame, especially the way you exchange the minors in the centre. One idea I might look at starting on move 18 is Ba6, looking to win the c4 pawn through pinning it to the bishop. After 19… d4 white may have 20.Bf3, working to isolate and eventually blockade your passed pawn. Another plan white can look at is 20.Bd3 and 21.Re1, looking to at least construct a fortress and possibly attack on the kingside with f4, Kf2, and Rch1. On move 26, play b5 immediately. With the passed pawn, you want to be the active player. 30…Be2+ is probably losing, because it forces you to trade on c1 and give white the active rook. Playing d3 to defend your bishop also breaks up your pawn chain, and paralyzes your bishop. Game 2 On move 15, there’s no need to push e4. Your bishop isn’t getting past your f4 pawn, so all that’s really happening is you’re surrendering control of d4. Nice of your opponent to give you a pawn with Qd7. I guess they thought the attack on the h-file was far stronger than it was. On move 27 you should play Qg4 immediately. Your queen doesn’t do much on f3 while your opponent’s is good, and with rooks still on the board you should be able to leverage your kingside pawn majority despite the doubled g-pawn. You don’t want to trade the queen’s on the f-file. Even though you open a line, the f-file isn’t very good since your king can’t cross it without black trading rooks (and into a drawn endgame). 35.Qd5 creates the threat of fxg6 (where the f7 pawn will be a target), and you can put your rook on f3 if black attacks h3. 40…Kg5 by black is horrific; g5 should be sufficient to lock the position since white can never push h4. However, it will take some finesse by black to get the tempi right to both keep white’s king from c6 and get the bishop to h4. Game 3 (I assume you mean white won this game.) On move 18, leave the knight on f6. In this position, where white only has a LS bishop, single knight, and rook, it’s worth taking on the double-iso f-pawns to get the bishop pair. White’s b-pawn would become a huge target. On move 20, instead of moving your king, develop your bishop. You can’t play with only one piece. 23…Bxd4 might be enough to draw, although I’m not sure. I think the endgame is drawable, too, but you have to keep your king on the kingside where the passer will be. I think your bishop can hold the queenside on its own. 47…Bf5 should do it. Since you’re playing to draw, the b-pawn almost entirely doesn’t matter. Any threat to sacrifice it to create a passed a-pawn is mitigated by how advanced your pawn would be, and how you’d almost certainly be able to deal with both white and black pawns with the bishop on c4. Game 4 Granted I’m not an expert in the English, but I don’t know that you want to play h3-Kh2. Usually you take that route when you want to put a bishop on e3 and keep the black knight off g4. Since black’s knights are on the queenside, Re1 (to meet Bh3 with Bh1) may be better. I don’t know that you want to push e3, since weakening d3 is more significant than defending d4. Instead, play Rb1 immediately and load up on b7. I do not understand why black played Nc6 over Bxg2. Game 5 Nice job. I assume you mocked black mercilessly for missing 15…f4. Some time next week I'll try write up my tournament from Italy. I missed a killshot against a >2300 that would've had me end at +2.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2013 02:47
|
|
|
Thanks for this! To be honest I also really liked my play in the first game. I feel like I got a fairly good advantage out of the opening (with no theory knowledge of the nimzo) and I had solid concrete plans for the middle game. I missed two opportunities, Bxe2 was mistimed and forcing the rook trade was just terrible, simply putting the rook behind the pawn is winning. I'm not particularly proud of my English games this tournament in game 2 I should have pushed more like you said. I allowed it to get to a drawish endgame, and thought there was more to the fixed backward pawn weakness. With complete accurate play it would be a draw but my opponent did give me a couple opportunities that I missed. Game 4, I let him get too much play out of the opening, h3 kh2 wastes a lot of tempi especially if the position isn't closed. Game 3 I know I misplayed this terribly, his knight got really active and my bishops were really tangled. The endgame was definitely drawable, but for some reason I missed why pushing that pawn was really bad in the endgame.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2013 13:30
|
|
|
Well my rating has been steadily climbing. I play in a chess club on Tuesday nights and hopefully I will be able to continue with my super busy schedule. I started at 1000 rating about a year ago and now am at 1600. Mainly I've had to learn to slow down and work on safety - my mind in it's normal state is racing all over the place and it's difficult for me to concentrate. Now-a-days I never make epic blunders in long games, just blunders of the more advanced positional kind. I.e., not losing to a combo, just an inaccuracy leading to a tough position that spirals. I am able to fight back a lot and even win games in this situation though which is nice. Some nice results so far include: Win vs 1700 http://www.chesspastebin.com/2013/09/24/martin-david-challoner-byron-by-cowoncrack/ Win vs 1800 http://www.chesspastebin.com/2013/09/24/pena-jr-al-challoner-byron-by-cowoncrack/ Losses (instructive) vs a 1900. As black both times, I maintain equality for a long time and even have the edge, but then he nails me with some VERY nice piece sacrifices and accurate move orders in both games. http://www.chesspastebin.com/2013/09/24/newell-george-challoner-byron-by-cowoncrack/ http://www.chesspastebin.com/2013/09/24/newell-george-challoner-byron-by-cowoncrack-2/ Black in all four games it seems. My 1..Nf6 seems to work well in club play!
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2013 03:31
|
|
|
Pretty good games. Nice technique in that second win. I can't get anyone to play the alekhine against me in a classic time control. It always ends up being a four knights (since I play e5 against nc3).
singe fucked around with this message at 04:07 on Sep 26, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2013 23:25
|
|
|
Nice games, CoC. Nobody should ever, ever resign in the position that David Martin resigned in. It's a tablebase win for black, but far from a fait accompli.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2013 03:40
|
|
|
Yo I forgot there was a thread in here! Neat position from a game I played a week or two ago online. Black responded with ...Bd6 here, which loses by force. How? 
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2013 04:04
|
|
|
didn't calculate but looks like the classic double bishop sac
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2013 04:08
|
|
|
tentative8e8op posted:I signed up as therapeutic8e8op on chess.com if anyone would like to play. I haven't played very many games ever and I only started really playing against a friend like a month ago, but Ive had tons of fun watching and reading about games if that makes sense. Ugh you loving jerk you pulled me back into this black hole timesink of a game, now it's only a matter of time before I'm watching back to back kingcrusher videos. Thanks a lot 
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2013 13:34
|
|
|
Control Volume posted:Ugh you loving jerk you pulled me back into this black hole timesink of a game, now it's only a matter of time before I'm watching back to back kingcrusher videos. Thanks a lot Oh man, that's what happened to me. For a year. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2013 22:21
|
|
|
I promised that I would get my games up before the end of the month. Because of reasons, I haven't had time to give much of an analysis, but I promised they'd be up so here they are. The most interesting ones are #7 and #9. The short draw was because there were two games that day, and I was on vacation. The first game was my first proper game in over a year, and went about as expected. Game #2 is somewhat amusing for me almost throwing it away by trying to clown the guy. I hung a draw in game #6, but luckily he was bad and missed it. The 1871 I drew in round 4 actually ended up a full point ahead of me, and finished (losing) on board 5. [Date "2013.09.01"] [Round "1"] [Result "1-0"] [BlackElo "2009"] [ECO "C41"] [EventDate "2013.09.??"] [WhiteElo "2390"] 1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 e5 4.Nf3 Nbd7 5.Bc4 Be7 6.O-O O-O 7.Re1 c6 8.a4 a5 9.b3 Nb6 10.Bd3 exd4 11.Nxd4 d5 12.e5 Ne8 13.Kh1 g6 14.Bh6 Ng7 15.f4 f6 16.Qd2 fxe5 17.fxe5 c5 18.Nf3 Bg4 19.Ng5 Rc8 20.Nxd5 Nxd5 21.Bc4 Kh8 22.Bxd5 Bxg5 23.Bxg5 Qd7 24.c4 b6 25.Bf6 Rce8 26.Qh6 Be6 27.Rad1 Qf7 28.Kg1 Kg8 29.Rf1 Nf5 30.Rxf5 gxf5 31.Rd3 1-0 [Date "2013.09.02"] [Round "2"] [Result "1-0"] [BlackElo "1878"] [ECO "C00"] [EventDate "2013.09.??"] [WhiteElo "2009"] 1.e4 e6 2.Qe2 c5 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.g3 g6 5.Na3 Bg7 6.Nb5 d6 7.Qd3 Bf8 8.Bg2 a6 9.Na3 Bg7 10.O-O Nge7 11.Qe2 O-O 12.c3 Qc7 13.Nc2 e5 14.h3 Bd7 15.Rd1 Rad8 16.d4 cxd4 17.cxd4 exd4 18.Ncxd4 Nxd4 19.Nxd4 Nc6 20.Be3 Nxd4 21.Bxd4 Bb5 22.Qe3 Bxd4 23.Rxd4 Kg7 24.Rad1 Qe7 25.Qa3 Qg5 26.h4 Qf6 27.Rxd6 Rxd6 28.Rxd6 Qe5 29.Rd5 Qc7 30.h5 Qc1+ 31.Kh2 Bc6 32.Rc5 Qh6 33.Bf3 Re8 34.Qc3+ Kg8 35.Kg2 Rd8 36.b4 Qd2 37.Qf6 Qd6 38.Qh4 Re8 39.h6 f6 40.a3 b6 41.Rc1 Qe6 42.Qf4 g5 43.Qe3 g4 44.Bxg4 Qxe4+ 45.Qxe4 Bxe4+ 46.Bf3 f5 47.Bxe4 fxe4 48.Rc6 e3 49.Kf1 exf2 50.Rxb6 Re3 51.Rxa6 Rxg3 52.b5 Rg5 53.a4 Rf5 54.b6 1-0 [Date "2013.09.03"] [Round "3"] [Result "1-0"] [BlackElo "2009"] [ECO "B07"] [EventDate "2013.09.??"] [WhiteElo "2160"] 1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 e5 4.Nge2 Nbd7 5.f3 c6 6.Be3 b5 7.Qd2 Qa5 8.g4 b4 9.Nd1 d5 10.g5 Nh5 11.Bg2 Bb7 12.Nf2 O-O-O 13.O-O c5 14.c3 Kb8 15.cxb4 Qxb4 16.Qxb4 cxb4 17.Rfd1 f6 18.Rd2 fxg5 19.Bxg5 Nhf6 20.Rad1 Re8 21.dxe5 Nxe5 22.Bf4 dxe4 23.Rd8+ Rxd8 24.Bxe5+ Bd6 25.Rxd6 Ka8 26.fxe4 Rc8 27.Rd2 Rhe8 28.Bd6 Nxe4 29.Nxe4 Bxe4 30.Bxb4 Bxg2 31.Kxg2 Rc7 32.Bc3 Kb7 33.Nd4 Rd7 34.Rf2 Re4 35.Nf5 g6 36.Ng3 Re6 37.Re2 Rxe2+ 38.Nxe2 Kc6 39.Kf3 Rd5 40.Nf4 Rf5 41.Ke4 a6 42.Be5 Kc5 43.a3 Kc4 44.Nd5 a5 45.Ne3+ 1-0 [Date "2013.09.04"] [Round "4"] [Result "1/2-1/2"] [BlackElo "1871"] [ECO "B70"] [EventDate "2013.09.??"] [WhiteElo "2009"] 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 6.g3 Bg7 7.Bg2 Bd7 8.O-O Nc6 9.Nde2 O-O 10.h3 Rc8 11.Nd5 Nxd5 12.exd5 Na5 13.a4 Nc4 14.Ra2 Qc7 15.b3 Na5 16.Bd2 b6 17.Bxa5 bxa5 18.Nd4 Bxd4 19.Qxd4 Qc5 20.Qe4 Rfe8 21.g4 Qb4 22.Qe3 Rc7 23.Rd1 Qc3 24.Rd3 Qf6 25.Qd2 Rc5 26.c4 Qh4 27.Qf4 f5 28.f3 g5 29.Qd4 f4 30.Re2 Qh6 31.Qc3 Qg7 32.Qe1 Qf6 33.Bf1 Kg7 34.Re4 Kf7 35.Be2 h6 36.Bd1 e5 37.dxe6+ Rxe6 38.Bc2 Bc6 39.Rxe6 Qxe6 40.Qd2 d5 41.Kg2 dxc4 42.bxc4 Re5 43.Kf2 Qe7 44.Rd6 Re2+ 45.Qxe2 Qxd6 46.Be4 Qd4+ 47.Kg2 Bxe4 48.Qxe4 Qxe4 1/2-1/2 [Date "2013.09.05"] [Round "5"] [Result "1/2-1/2"] [BlackElo "2009"] [ECO "E11"] [EventDate "2013.09.??"] [WhiteElo "2187"] 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 Bb4+ 4.Bd2 a5 5.g3 d6 6.Bg2 Nbd7 7.O-O e5 8.Bc1 exd4 9.Nxd4 O-O 10.Qc2 1/2-1/2 [Date "2013.09.05"] [Round "6"] [Result "1-0"] [BlackElo "1909"] [ECO "B92"] [EventDate "2013.09.??"] [WhiteElo "2009"] 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Be2 e5 7.Nb3 Be7 8.Bg5 Nbd7 9.a4 Qc7 10.a5 h6 11.Be3 b5 12.axb6 Nxb6 13.Na5 O-O 14.O-O Rd8 15.Bf3 Rb8 16.Qe2 d5 17.Bxb6 Rxb6 18.Nxd5 Nxd5 19.exd5 Rxb2 20.Nc6 Re8 21.Rab1 Rxb1 22.Nxe7+ Rxe7 23.Rxb1 f5 24.Qd2 Qd6 25.c4 Rc7 26.Be2 Kf7 27.Qa5 Rb7 28.Rd1 Rc7 29.h4 Rc5 30.Qa4 Bd7 31.Qb3 a5 32.Rb1 a4 33.Qb7 Rc7 34.Qa8 Rc8 35.Qa7 Rc7 36.Qa5 Rc5 37.Qd8 Rc8 38.Rb6 Rxd8 39.Rxd6 Ke7 40.Ra6 Be8 41.Kf1 Rd6 42.Ra7+ Rd7 43.Ra5 Rb7 44.g4 g6 45.c5 Rb4 46.Ra7+ Kd8 47.c6 Rd4 48.c7+ 1-0 [Date "2013.09.06"] [Round "7"] [Result "0-1"] [BlackElo "2009"] [ECO "A37"] [EventDate "2013.09.??"] [WhiteElo "2190"] 1.Nf3 c5 2.c4 Nc6 3.g3 e5 4.Nc3 g6 5.Bg2 Bg7 6.d3 Nge7 7.O-O O-O 8.Ne1 d6 9.Nc2 Be6 10.Ne3 Qd7 11.Re1 Rab8 12.Ned5 a6 13.a4 b6 14.Rb1 Nb4 15.Nxb4 cxb4 16.Nd5 Nxd5 17.cxd5 Bg4 18.Be3 Rfc8 19.Qb3 a5 20.h4 b5 21.Ra1 bxa4 22.Rxa4 Qb5 23.Bf1 Bd7 24.Rea1 Ra8 25.Qa2 Qxa4 26.Qxa4 Bxa4 27.Rxa4 Rc2 28.b3 Rb2 29.Bb6 Rxb3 30.Bh3 f5 31.Rxa5 Rxa5 32.Bxa5 Rb1+ 33.Kg2 b3 34.e4 b2 35.Bc3 Rg1+ 0-1 [Date "2013.09.07"] [Round "8"] [Result "1/2-1/2"] [BlackElo "2250"] [ECO "A04"] [EventDate "2013.09.??"] [WhiteElo "2009"] 1.Nf3 c5 2.b3 d6 3.Bb2 e5 4.g3 g6 5.Bg2 Bg7 6.O-O Ne7 7.e3 O-O 8.d4 exd4 9.exd4 Nbc6 10.c3 cxd4 11.cxd4 Bg4 12.Qd2 Qb6 13.Na3 d5 14.Ne5 Be6 15.Nc2 Rac8 16.Rfe1 Rfd8 17.Rad1 Nf5 18.Nxc6 Rxc6 19.Ne3 Bh6 20.f4 Nxe3 21.Rxe3 Rdc8 22.Rc3 Rxc3 23.Bxc3 Bg7 24.Bf3 Qc6 25.Rc1 Qb6 26.Kg2 h5 27.Ba5 Qxd4 28.Rxc8+ Bxc8 1/2-1/2 [Date "2013.09.09"] [Round "9"] [Result "1-0"] [BlackElo "2009"] [ECO "C65"] [EventDate "2013.09.??"] [WhiteElo "2322"] 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.d3 Bc5 5.O-O d6 6.c3 O-O 7.h3 a6 8.Ba4 b5 9.Bc2 h6 10.b4 Bb6 11.a4 Rb8 12.Na3 Bd7 13.Rb1 Ne7 14.d4 Ng6 15.c4 exd4 16.Nxd4 bxa4 17.Nf3 Re8 18.Re1 Bc6 19.Nd2 Re6 20.b5 axb5 21.cxb5 Bb7 22.Nac4 Bc5 23.Ba3 Bxa3 24.Nxa3 Qe7 25.b6 cxb6 26.Rxb6 d5 27.Rxe6 Qxe6 28.e5 Ne4 29.Nxe4 dxe4 30.Bxe4 Bxe4 31.Rxe4 Qb3 32.Qd6 Rb6 33.Qc5 Re6 34.f4 Nh4 35.Qf2 Rg6 36.Qxh4 Qxa3 37.Qf2 Qb3 38.Re3 Qb6 39.Kh2 Rc6 40.Qe2 Qa6 41.Qf3 g6 42.Rd3 Qa8 43.Qd1 Kg7 44.Rd7 Re6 45.Qd4 a3 46.Ra7 Qf8 47.Qc3 Qb8 48.Rxa3 Qb1 49.Rb3 Qf5 50.Rb4 h5 51.Qf3 Ra6 52.Qe3 Qc2 53.Rb7 Ra2 54.Qf3 Qf5 55.Rb4 Ra7 56.Rb6 Ra2 57.Rf6 Qc2 58.Qd5 Ra7 59.Qd4 Qc7 60.Rd6 Kh7 61.f5 Qe7 62.fxg6+ fxg6 63.e6 Kh6 64.Qe3+ Qg5 65.Qxa7 Qe5+ 66.Kh1 Qxd6 67.Qe3+ Kg7 68.e7 Qd1+ 69.Kh2 Qd6+ 70.g3 1-0
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2013 01:07
|
|
|
hehehe
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2013 19:38
|
|
|
Out of curiosity I decided to a computer analysis on a quick game where I stomped a dude in 16 moves to see if I could have stomped him harder. The very first mistake it caught was this: 1. e4 c5?! (0.88) INACCURACY - Perhaps better was 1... d5 and the projected moves from that mistake: 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. Nf3 f5 4. exf5 d5 5. d4 Nf6 Cool analysis.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2013 03:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 23:20 |
|
|
Uh... what program is that?
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2013 04:40
|
|