Obviously, I got pounded.  I actually understood the majority of the moves... what I'm looking for from you, the reader, the kibitzer, the fellow chess nerd, etc... is a second opinion.  Give this game your careful attention and maybe we can all learn from each other.  I've included the name of my opponent (without asking :S) because I feel he deserves the credit... hope no one is offended :).

 

Enjoy!

 

2Bc4 isn t this the portuguese opening?

I've only ever heard it called the Bishops Opening.

I think it s called the portuguese, remember of seeing a book based on it by GM Kevin Spragett, i ll investigate

You were right.Portuguese opening is 2Bc5,quite unusefull i would say.About the game u had vry interesting ideas, you play the kind of chess style i appreciate.

Interesting idea with f4?!  You should do some more analysis on that move.  Use Rybka and your own brain to pound out some moves.  It may be good in blitz but not in correspondence.  Or it may be a novelty that you could play in tournaments.  It is hard to say at the moment.

KillaBeez wrote: Interesting idea with f4?!  You should do some more analysis on that move.  Use Rybka and your own brain to pound out some moves.  It may be good in blitz but not in correspondence.  Or it may be a novelty that you could play in tournaments.  It is hard to say at the moment.

---

 According to rybka, the black defense was perfect, with most deviations winning for white almost immediately.  I don't know how much more analysis I can do WITHOUT the help of an engine, the line is too complex.  

 

It would seem you're right... a great novelty, even at high levels, but not correspondence material.

To me f4?! looked hugely optimistic, and was never going to work. It is possible it is a style thing though, because my coach says I need to play more aggresively. (The games I have seen you post, would not make that comment with you ).

  Think after 6...d5 need to find a better continuation, because letting black get too much after what you played. Maybe 7pxp followed by Bg5 not really sure, because don't play this opening.

it is called the bishops opening because i have been studying it quite a lot recently.

What's this about including my name without my permission?  It might not have been so bad if you had also mentioned that I'm handsome, single and rich.  All lies of course, but still would have been nice if you had mentioned it.

 

On a more serious note (believe or not I CAN be serious), I thought throwing in my two cents worth on a couple of positions might help.  And if not, it will still make me look like I know what I'm talking about.  Oops, forgot to stay serious.  Sorry.

 

First I want to thank Ih8sens for an excellent game that pushed me to the limit defensively.  We've played off and on since I joined the site and his aggressive tactical play is always a challenge.  Second, and more important to me, is my thanks for the wonderful conversation that accompanies our games.  I always look forward to it.

 

Okay then.  There was an open question put out in the analysis above about a possibly better idea on White's 9. a3.  It's not that the move made is necessarily bad, but it does waste tempo.  Anyone who has ever talked with me about opening strategy has heard the same refrain over and over.  The first part of the game is about nothing else EXCEPT tempo!  Tempo is EVERYTHING!  If you can gain a lead in development and cross the 'frontier line' before your opponent, you win.  It's really that simple.  So, three alternatives come to mind.  If an 'escape' square was the idea, then 9. c3 would be a better choice since this pawn move is at least directed at the center, thereby adding something toward the development.  But the straightforward 9. Bd2 or even better in my opinion 9. Ng3 (look at the number of squares White has some say in on Black's kingside after this move - the two knights and the bishop @ c1 are doing some serious work now) would have good choices.

 

But the critical move in the game as mentioned in the notes above was 26. h4.  In all fairness to my opponent, it is a natural looking move that appears to put Black in some distress.  And Black's 'refutation' (27..., Bxf5) is a hard move to find regardless of which side of the board you are playing on.  But it definately helped to relieve the tension and allowed Black to ultimately open the position in his favor when the material advantage could then count for something.

 

Since I am already writing a mini-novel (a horrible habit - just ask Ih8sens - it takes longer to read some of my in-game messages than it does to ponder a move), I will simply give the ideas without comment.  If there is some curiousity about any particular move or variation, just ask here and I will elaborate then.

 

Two ideas that can keep White from deteriorating further are 26. Nd6 and 26. Raf1, as follows:

 

26. Nd6, Qe7  27. Nxc8, Raxc8  28. Raf1, Rcd8  29. Kg2, a5 etc.

- OR -

26. Raf1, Nxf7  27. Nd6, Qxg6  28. Nxf7+, Rxf7  29. Rxf7, Kh7  30. Re7, Bc5 etc.

 

But a line that can slightly improve White and keep the pressure mounted begins with 26. Bc4. And now if Black tries 26..., Bd7 then 27. Raf1 and Black is faced with two choices, 26..., Bxf5 or 26..., Nxf5.  Neither leave a good taste in my mouth.  Again, I will be happy to give some continuations here if someone needs to see them.

 

So Black's best (after 26. Bc4) seems to be an immediate 26..., Bxf5.  The game might proceed as follows:

 

26. Bc4, Bxf5  27. gxf5, Ng8  28. Rg1, Qh5  29. Rg4, Nh6, 30. Rgg3, Qh4 with continued pressure on Black's game.

 

There are some thoughts to play around with.  Wonderful game!

Its so nice to see beautiful games !!!!!!

Thanks.