Ok, I'm not the best at end games. But, what's important is not wasting tempo that means time which can be used to mate right away. And, even when you're up and he only has a K, tempo is important because it can make the difference between a win and a draw. It'll often be the difference between a checkmate and stalemate. But, you kept checking black, and he ran back. Now, if had realized the game could've ended in a draw by repetition, so instead of playing the same thing, try to find another move that will result in mate. But, I'm sure and am looking forward to other readers and commentators analyze and comment as they're stronger, and it'll also help you learn as it is very difficult to explain.
Game Help
Yes, and what Bobby-J-Fischer is what Jack Stockel implies in the advice. It is about being careful before a move a made. And, remember, it is important to look out for all threats and what your opponent can do, as Bobby-J-Fischer just noted. This is also why it's important to take your time and not rush, and study the game carefully, or as he studies, "Study the Position." I also have to note that even earlier, and this is something my coach would ask to. So, after 2.Nf3, Qh4 3.Nxe5 was played. Why didn't you play 3.Nxh4 This would have won the Q which is worth much more then a pawn. You lose a Q that early and the game is generally lost.
Yeah that was horrible of me I just saw it now. I must have been doing something else at the time before i made the move
It's ok, you can't see everything, Alation, as I learned. But, it was just to help. I remember missing opportunities like that, but then it's important to now what can be done to differently to learn. That's the way you improve.
In addition, I did some analyzing, but not a full analysis. There is a blundere that you made on move 8, as you played 8.fxe4?? I do now why, however. The idea was to win a pawn, but as I said, it's important to look for all threats made by your opponent, and taking that pawn allowed black to win your piece, and pieces are worth more then pawns. And, then you exchanged with 9.Bxc6+ Now, exchanging pawns aren't so bad, but as a general rule, you don't want to liquidate, exchange pieces when you're behind. The reason is because it benefits the opponent. Why? The reason is that you need pieces so by trading, you have less to defend with which will often cause big problems in the end. Aside from what Bobby-J-Fischer and I said, you played extremely well. In fact, you played like an 1100 rated player.
I notice the game was played with a time control of 15/10. With such rapid games it is often not possible to analyse every position.
However, I would recommend that you take some of your games and spend an hour or so analysing them - I would go so far as to create an annotated game (with comments) so that you can post it here. The process of deep thinking and making the comments is useful.
Here is what I would do exactly, step by step.
1. Use the Learn - Game Explorer function on this site to see when the game departed from the lines that are usually played by strong players. In this case, you will see that 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 is fine (the King Knight's Opening) and is opening book, but that 2. ... Qh4 has never been played. When this happens it is usually because there is a serious defect with the move. Study the position and try to work out what that defect is. In this case it should not take long; as JoeyKTrombone points out, white can just take the queen. It should be game over :)
2. Once you are out of the opening book you need some help. One of the best ways is to use a computer to analyse the game. There are a few ways to do this. You can use the feature on this site - when the game is finished just click Analyse and you will receive a link to an annotated game. Another way is to use software on your own computer or a web-based system such as https://nextchessmove.com/. When the computer says a particular move is bad try to understand why.
3. When you have produced your own annotated game post it here and ask other members to comment about anything you may have missed.
It is good to play lots of games. However, if you couple this with occasional deep thinking and analysis you will get better very quickly.
However, people can talk about development, pawn structure, tempos, zugswang, activity etc. All of these things are important. But if you are making serious tactical errors then this will dominate and those other things are not important. At ratings of about 1000 and less I think most games are decided by chance - the winner is the one who makes the least blunders. So, since you missed 2.Nxh4 which, to be honest, is a really easy move to spot, in my opinion you should really focus on tactics as a matter or priority.
Why do I say it was easy to spot? Because typical advice about playing chess is to do the following before you move:
1. Are you in check? If so, what can you do about it?
2. Are any of your pieces directly threatened? If so, do you have to worry about it? That is, can you take back? And at the end of a capture series will you be up or down. (For example, if a higher value piece is threatened by a lower valued piece or a pawn that is normally something to be concerned about.)
3. Can you take any of your opponents pieces? If so, can he take back (the same thinking as in point 2 applies).
4. Can you check your opponent? Does it lead to anything? (Don't check for the sake of it.)
It only take a few seconds or a minute at most to do this. If you did this you would soon have seen (from point 3) that on your third move you had an opportunity to capture. That said, with very fast time controls there is not always time to do the above which is why the quality of the games is normally poor.
Hope this helps.
I think corum's advice is very good. I didn't realize that this was a fast game, alation. There's limits to, like if you were winning, then going fast shouldn't be as bad, as long as, you know what you're doing. So, what I sometimes do is analyze on the opponents and, believe it or not, set up conditional moves. But, what he said about annotating and really analyzing is essential. In fact, that's something GM Natalia Pogonina emphasizes in her thread, "Game Analysis", and annotating a game is a very good way to do that. In fact, it's my favorite because it has helped me because then you analyze where you went wrong and what could or ought to have been done differently.
Hello, I am still relatively new to Chess. I would like help on the right continuation for me at the ending of this game. If anyone can recommend the best way to study endgames that would be great, as I usually just play a long noobish way in order to eventually checkmate my opponent with the easy ladder technique. Here is the match: http://www.chess.com/livechess/game?id=1130627883 Other analysis of my shitty moves would be appreciated.