Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

A good fight but lost nevertheless

Following my loss to Guinto and this blog post. I went to the next round quite determined and rearing to a win. My opponent is a kid, really a small kid and when he replied 1.e4 with e5, I tried to get him to my favorite battle ground of King's gambit. The game was going quite predicatably until he gave me a blow b5! I had to give up a pawn to avoid a clumsy position. Then he made an in accuracy and I was able to get the upper hand. This is the position where I again slipped, this time not through negligance but by a different kind of error underestimating my opponent. I thought he would not be able to handle the tactics and play a technical game. Which he did quite masterfully and after a few innacuracies in time pressure he actually beat me! Without further ado the game..

What a game and I should've have known better than to underestimate my kid opponent because he actually won the tournament! getting 5.5/6. Good things this is not bad loss but still feels stupid to loose two games in a row when you are the 2nd seed and have a shot at the first prize. Well after this game, I won the next rounds and got 10th place, but a very unremarkable place. My opponent played well and I think he deserves the win.

Comments


  • 2 years ago

    browni3141

    Michael Brown is my cousin, but he's not a small kid, and I don't think he plays chess. I guess Michael and Brown are pretty common names, so it's not a huge surprise.

  • 3 years ago

    Fred-Splott

    I had 15 .... c5 as the losing blunder before I saw the Fritz analysis. It's the first obviously bad move you played and it led to you playing at the end a piece down due to your stranded knight when you tried to rationalise the blunder in terms of attacking white's king. The situation warranted a sharper attempt at attack. I thought your opponent played some quite decent moves.

  • 4 years ago

    NM smalugu

    @david Bd4 was not possible because he would capture the bishop and then the e4 pawn after which d4 falls :(

    @c-saw I didn't exactly underestimate him but got excited by variations where I had interesting winning chances. This excitement clouted my rational thinking that my opponent need not enter those variations :)

  • 4 years ago

    C-Saw

    What a game...and I know just how you feel.  You know you should win easily..but because of that you dont play as fiercely as you should have and then..BOOM..he gets the upper hand and then goes on to win..Its not so bad getting beat by a kid..but underestimating an opponent and the loosing because of a mental error like that is worse than getting beat outright...I know this from experiance..its a tough lesson we all must learn. There is no room for underestimation in chess..an opponent rated 500 points below you can beat you if you underestimate him because we dont play our best unless  we think we might lose...Thanks for sharing the game..

  • 4 years ago

    davidmelbourne

    As an old(ish) bloke, I feel your pain:) Good on you for posting a highly entertaining and instructive loss.

    As for a low rater thought: I would have immediately thought of playing 23 Bd4 (rather than Qc2, chasing R back), to keep the rooks separate for as long as possible, and to try make hay with his vulnerable R on the 1st rank. 

  • 4 years ago

    NM smalugu

    @jedikush its not that easy after all. I considered 22.b4 but he gets the c4 square through e5. Activate my king? the rooks would tear apart any chances (or so i felt). 33.Qb7 move has no sense other than a waiting move. also i had time pressure at that point

  • 4 years ago

    jedikush

    33 qb7..?!? why?

  • 4 years ago

    jedikush

    personally i feel after he gave up the queen u made a few inaccuracies.. by not controlling where his Knight could go..

     

    instead of 24 a4.... B4 would have been nice.. also with the dark squared bishop.. this means ALL the dark squares are YOURS... so that in and of itself is a devastating advantage.

     

    apart from that you didnt activate your king and 2 pawns tht would have created a significant threat to blacks king and forces him to keep his rooks right there as your pawns would bea significant wall to stop the rooks from doing anything.

    .. but all in all this "kid" played amazingly.

  • 4 years ago

    NM smalugu

    thanks nikhil. Worst part is my opponent played most of the moves without thinking much! I felt I've been outplayed all over. Also he is well prepared. b5 is book, see the important of preperation

  • 4 years ago

    FM Nikhileshk

    your opponent played with great technique ...i really liked some of his moves ...b5 !.....Na5 ! ...nice little combination with rooks and pawns and the final cautious Ke6 ! Good to see kids play so well !  nevertheless ...you did well satya ! could have done better .... are you forced to play the Bishop to d5 in the opening stage and give up strong centre for black ? you could have played 10. a4 or something instead of 10. 0-0 ...

  • 4 years ago

    D1SK

    If all I had to learn next time was to not judge my opponent for whatever reason, I'd be a really happy camper. Even still, I've also lost my opportunity at 1st prize. I knew I was better than my opponent yet I still lost to him at a king and pawn endgame (it was my very first match entering the tournament). I suffered one loss and it turns out that jerk won first prize...the only prize.

    It's really hard to admit defeat and display a loss, but this was a really great game nevertheless.

Back to Top

Post your reply: