OT.com Chess Federation©®™(OTCF©®™)(was: How about a game of chess?) — Page 15

Your Bishop can't move to d4 and there is no piece on d4 to capture.

I don't know why I said d4 because I meant to capture your knight h4.  Sometimes I can't figure out why I made some of my weird errors like that.  Sorry.

g3

Pxd5

Kh1

Qg4

Rg1

Re8

gxh4

Qf3+

You then make your only legal move, Rg2, after which I play Re1 mate, and I let out a big sigh of relief.

JEDIT: Now that I read that, I hope I didn't come off as condescending.  I was really nervous this whole game, and only by a miracle did I manage to reframe my position in a good light.  I then laid several traps that you weren't walking into, right up till the end.  You played well, and I hope you don't mind that I finished the game.  I am willing to play another at handicap, if you wish.  I love chess, and I'd love to keep playing and sharpening your skills.  If you wish, I can even walk you through my mental processes throughout the game so you can see why I did what I did, you can learn more about my style and strategies (and thus not fall for them), and also get some good general pointers in tactics.  Again, I'm nothing great, but if you're interested, I might be able to improve your game.

darth_ender said:

You then make your only legal move, Rg2, after which I play Re1 mate, and I let out a big sigh of relief.

#%&@!!!!!!!  *&^%!!!!!   *sigh*  

: (   

oh well. 

darth_ender said:

JEDIT: Now that I read that, I hope I didn't come off as condescending.

nope.  You just stated the truth.   Rg2 was forced and and the results obvious.    Even Deep Blue wouldn't have been able to figure a way out once you played Qf3.   Boy, did I screw this game up

darth_ender said:

 I was really nervous this whole game, and only by a miracle did I manage to reframe my position in a good light.  I then laid several traps that you weren't walking into, right up till the end.  You played well, and I hope you don't mind that I finished the game.  I am willing to play another at handicap, if you wish.  I love chess, and I'd love to keep playing and sharpening your skills.  If you wish, I can even walk you through my mental processes throughout the game so you can see why I did what I did, you can learn more about my style and strategies (and thus not fall for them), and also get some good general pointers in tactics.  Again, I'm nothing great, but if you're interested, I might be able to improve your game.

 yes,  I'd be interested in what you have to say, I'd be especially interested in hearing where you think I screwed up. 

I'll explain my thoughts when I can.  I'm at work away from my computer and the software I played the game on where I can review the moves better.  Thanks for taking it well.  I am enjoying playing you. :)

of course you are enjoying it, you've won all the games : \

Hey, I've lost quite a few games in my day.  Though that sucks, when I manage to beat a superior opponent, that is when I really feel a great deal of satisfaction, in some ways outweighing the winning of several games.  Hang in there and you might just show me the smackdown.  This is also how you get better.  That is why I really want to analyze my side of the game for you.  If you know my thoughts, you might be able to better counter them in the future.

Alright Warb, here was my strategy.  Hopefully you are able to replay the game as well with software or something, because it would be easier to follow my train of thought.

In the beginning, I was playing strategically, not tactically.  As black, one has the inherent slight disadvantage of a more defensive game, especially at higher levels.  White gets to set the tone and pace a bit in the beginning.  And since I knew I had that vulnerability next to my king, I wanted to get him safely castled as quickly as possible, and preferably on queen side.  Obviously king side is almost always preferable, but with that missing pawn, king side remained vulnerable, so I figured queen side was better.

By turn 8, my king was safer in the corner, and you had my knight pinned with your bishop, with my queen as the important piece behind.  I figured it would be better to remove the pin early to prevent complications down the road, and since I'm usually willing to trade knights for bishops (the latter tend to be more valuable as the board frees up, while the former are better in the early, cramped parts of the game), I was okay with forcing a trade.  However, I recaptured your bishop with my pawn instead of queen.  I can't remember exactly why I did this, but I think it may have been because one shouldn't usually develop the queen too early, and I wanted to keep her protected till later.

That said, you began making effective use of your knight, placing him among my own pieces, but with his effective reach.  I was forced to either remove your knight or move my queen, and I figured again that I wouldn't mind a trade of my bishop for your knight, since we'd already done the reverse just before.  And I was ultimately hoping for a king-side attack on h2 with my queen supported by my black-square bishop, so I gave up my white-square bishop more freely.

Then I made a serious error, one that you could have exploited far more: I moved my king to b8.  I'm not even sure why anymore.  I think I was afraid that you were going to eventually take advantage of the white-square diagonal and attack my king, so I was simply moving him early to "safety" in a position I thought was similar to the king-side castle.  Then I immediately realized that it was an error, and I wanted to take it back, but I didn't think it was fair to do so.  You trading the bishop for knight was wise, as it opened up the defense I'd worked so hard to create for my king.  I now had a pawn undefended by fellow pawns and my king sitting on an open file.  Meanwhile, your queen needed to make only a single move to check the king, which might have allowed an extra move to reposition for another strike...if only my queen and bishop weren't guarding the right square.  But I knew I couldn't leave her there forever, so this position really made me nervous, and I thought I just threw the whole game right there.

We both advanced our d pawns.  My hope was to threaten your queen with my rook as we captured each others' pawns.  It was a nother simple pin, but I thought I could win a pawn out of it, and maybe improve my position with a more aggressive setup.  Rooks are vulnerable on a crowded board with their limited mobility, but the middle was freeing up quick, and if I could control it with my rook, it would limit your queens abilities to harass me.

I then thought that perhaps I could take advantage of the open file on king-side with my queen backed up by my rook.  I suspected I could break through, as it is pretty easy to defend that sort of attack, but if I put pressure there, I might be able to divert your resources and perhaps find an exchange where I'd win material.  My bishop was still guarding the all-important black square I didn't want your queen to move to.  But then you scootched her over one square, now able to attack my vulnerable king by using the white square diagonal to get there.

You of course chose to defend against my pending assault rather than simply move to an attacking square, which was best of course.  You moved your knight to defend the g2 pawn and preserve your pawn line there.  But if I could effectively remove the knight, I'd then be able to take advantage of my queen-rook lineup.  I captured your d4 pawn with mine on turn 17, guessing that you'd counter with your pawn, which I'd then retake with my rook, gaining a pawn and attacking the critical knight.  If all didn't go well, I'd still maintain control of the center.  But instead of giving me this advantage, you moved your rook to d1.  I still had gained a pawn so far, but I wanted to keep my rook and not further damage my pawn structure in another trade.  So instead I moved my bishop, still hoping to evict your knight from the h4 square.  If you simply moved it, I'd checkmate you.  If not, I still might win the knight.  You captured my d4 pawn with your rook.

I used the discovered attack against your knight by advancing my pawn, while still baiting you with my rook.  If you took it, I knew I could come out ahead in the exchange, either by getting your knight or by mate.  You took my rook, I imagine expecting me to recapture with my pawn and even the exchange.  But I captured the knight, threatening mate on the next move if you didn't take action.  You moved your g pawn forward one.

Now here's where I became more and more tactical in my fight.  Your pawn move prevented me from battering through to you with the queen and rook, but obviously because of your king's placement, you could not legally take my bishop.  So I was free now to get your rook with my pawn.  Now though I remained behind one pawn from the initial handicap, I was a piece ahead.

Knowing your disadvantage with your king's placement, you moved him to h1.  But bear in mind in future games that the corner is where you can be mated most easily.  Even though you could legally capture the bishop, such would be suicide, as you'd have opened up that vital file and allowed me to place my queen on f2, mating you.  I left the bishop there, hoping you might make such an error.  Of course you did not.  But then I saw that there were other pins on your pawns I could make.  I placed my queen on g4, knowing that a move to h3 could threaten your rook and prevent you from capturing anything at g3 with your h2 pawn, a potential future attack I'd hoped for.  But more importantly, if I could go to the other side and attack your king from f3 or e4, I knew I could force you to move your king to the important (to me) f file, or even trick you to moving your rook that file.  While there was an advantage for you to do so, meaning that if you captured my bishop on the h file, you'd have your rook guarding the square you were worried about on g2.

I left my bishop there, deliberately hoping you'd ultimately take it, as I knew this would be your undoing.  At his point it really was no longer illegal, and you thought you had the right squares defended.  But what you didn't realize was that time was now working against you.  Your king now had only one square it could move to, and I could attack it with my queen.  Taking my bishop would give me enough time to maneuver my pieces to the proper spots.  I couldn't mate you immediately with the queen because you could safely block with your rook.  I needed a second piece to still attack your king.  So my rook, no longer needed for my original battering ram type attack with the queen, nor needed to pin your pawn, was placed on e8.  I was still nervous though that you might make better use of your queen.  You could have moved her to squares that might have prevented my attack, or at least made it more difficult.  That is why I left that tempting forbidden fruit, my bishop, just waiting for Eve to take a bite.  And since you did, your queen in a harmless position, I covered your only escape route with my queen.  Since you could only block with the rook, I sent my rook to e1, safe from your queen, unblockable by your now pinned rook.

I hope this was useful.  I was able to win your knight by taking advantage of a pinned pawn.  But aside from this, you should have made better use of your queen.  Look at our pawn structures on turn 20 or 21.  You had a much better defense than I did.  You could have sent me running to hide and gained a more favorable position.  Next time try to play to little strengths like that.

I'd be interested to hear any of your thoughts on this commentary.  It's not Bobby Fischer, just me.  But if it's useful, it might strengthen your game.  Another?  Same handicap?

let me think on this for a bit.

I have an idea, one that might even the odds a bit as well.  I love chess variants.  Perhaps we could play a variant.  Now don't get me wrong, I love true chess and find it to be a near-perfect game.  But there are fun variants I've always wanted to try.  Perhaps you'd be interested in giving one a try?

not sure, I still need to analyze our last game bit so I am make more sense out of your comments and maybe that will help me in the next game. 

OK.  Let me know if you're ever interested.  Like I said, I love chess variants, and I'd be happy to teach you a few.  Maybe I'll start a new thread.

Ok, I've analyzed the game a little, I have one question 

darth_ender said:

  But aside from this, you should have made better use of your queen.  Look at our pawn structures on turn 20 or 21.  You had a much better defense than I did.  You could have sent me running to hide and gained a more favorable position.  Next time try to play to little strengths like that.

perhaps maybe on move 20 this was true, but what else could I have done on move 21 other than g3 and avoid Qxg2 mate?

For much of the game, my strategy was to take advantage of the fact that you started the game down a pawn.    I tried to weaken you with even trades, knowing that the 1 pawn advantage would mean even more as we the more even trades we made.    Perhaps there were times I played too conservative.  I also should have paid more attention to the mounting attack on my King.   I also should have made better use of my Queen.  I knew putting my King in the corner was risky and I didn't like doing so, but at the time I thought it was a good calculated risk taken.   In hindsight perhaps it wasn't.   I totally screwed up at the end I should have seen that Qf3 and Re1  attack combo.   But I didn't.  Oh well.      

Unfortunately I have since had to shut down the computer and did not save the game.  I didn't think you needed me to keep it up anymore, so I don't have the exact moves before me.  However, you could be right that the position was unfavorable by move 21.  Nevertheless, when an opponent is pressing against you, you can sometimes buy yourself time by checking him.  This may have been possible in order to gain a more advantageous position.

Your strategy was sound, as a single pawn advantage is a guaranteed victory if held onto long enough.  But I turned the tables when I captured your knight, so even if I had not used that queen/rook combo, I still had the material advantage by that point.  Remember, it wasn't just any pawn I gave up.  It was a pawn right next to my king, which could have afforded opportunities for exploitation early in the game.  That's why I quickly castled queen-side.  And later, when I'd opened up the b file, you could have tried to exploit that for an attack.  My pawn structure was very weak by that point.

Again, I hope this doesn't sound condescending.  Just offering some friendly advice.  I'm always open to any insights you might have as well. :)

darth_ender said:

But I turned the tables when I captured your knight, so even if I had not used that queen/rook combo, I still had the material advantage by that point.

you wouldn't have had the advantage for long if I had been able to capture your bishop and still avoid the queen/rook combo. 

Shall we play another with the same handicap?

Definitely :)  Now that I've let you in on my secrets, you've got a pretty good chance of coming off as victor.  Of course I shan't make the same mistake I made this last time, but neither shall you, I imagine.

ok, just to make sure things are clear.   Again, you are playing black, I am playing white and you start the game without your f7 pawn.  With that clearly understood:

e4