How did i do in this game?

i figured it out: below is the game

Here is the full game. I resigned. Was it the right thing to do?

sorry i doubled posted the game and had to delete one of them.

As far as resigning on move 24, I feel that was perhaps a bit of an error. If you were unsure of how to proceed, you should have offered a draw or at least played it a bit further.

In your position, I think you are at a disadvantage due to having a knight pair vs a bishop pair, but I think you could at least take an initiative. with all these pawns, his bishops are hard pressed to get anything going, at least not after you play f5. However, you need to first get your a-pawn out of being en prise. Being down a pawn, you really shouldn't let yourself get any further as you transition into the end-game. I am unsure of black's intentions, because 23... Rad8 is actually a waste IMO. Black should have played 23... Kg7, with the threat of 24... Bxg4, winning a pawn. If 25 hxg4, then 25... Qxg4+, and the rest is forced 26 Kf2 (26 Ng3 leads to mate in two) Bh4+ 27 Ng3 Qxg3#, and if 26 Kh1 instead, then Rh8#.

But since he played Rad8, it is your move. You actually have a chance for a mean little trap. Playing 24 f5 leads to 24... Bxa2 (dies everywhere else) 25 Qc2, winning the black bishop as it is now trapped. So, I actually believe you could still win since it is your move. Black should have went on the offensive last move.

As for your actual gameplay, I kind of feel that 4. d4 or Bb5 would have served a better purpose. Bb5 would pin the knight, likely activating 4... a6 5 Ba4 b5 (releasing the pin as well as forming a pawn storm for a queenside push. Next would be 6 Bb3, and now your bishop is actually in a common spot seen in some variations of the Sicilian Dragon. However, I feel 4 d4 would have been best all around. This could transpose into the Sicilian Dragon, and I actually prefer white in most cases in this opening. If 4... cxd4, then 5 Nxd4 Nf6, and it is going a common route for most Sicilian games. 4 Bc4 is trying for a premature attack on the f-pawn.

For 5 Ng5, it is a bit premature here. It forces black to make an already common play of 5... e6. This most likely would have occurred anyways, so you are actually losing a tempo, and I don't see this knight helping out much so early. Read up a little on the Scheveningen: http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessopening?eco=B80 and you'll see that it is an acceptable position for black.

After 6... g6, your position is just begging for 7 f4. It would have been much more powerful if you had done Bb5 instead of Bc4, since you then could leave your pawn on e5. After 7 f4 Bg7 8 e5 dxe5 9 fxe5 Nxe5, then you have many possibilities with pinning the Knight to the king, or continuing to pressure the knight on f6 now that the rook is in the game.

For 9 Bxc6+, you shouldn't be trying to get rid of the lightsquared bishop so soon in a Sicilian game. Lots of action stems from his influence on the f7 pawn, especially once it is pinned to the black's kingside castled king. In this position, you have created a weak c6 pawn, but untill you can find a way to attack it with a knight, it isn't that weak. The only piece that could directly apply pressure to it is the lightsquared bishop, which you just exchanged. As you can see, your bishop naturally ended up on b5 anyways, so he probably should have gone there to begin with. It should also be noted that since you won't be able to get rid of that c6 pawn for a while, you have also destroyed your chances of getting a centralized knight on d5.

Now for 10 Nf3. I'd recommend f4 here first. Then you can play 11 Nf3. Since black has lost his queenside knight, he has lost a protector of the e5 quare, so after 10 f4, 11 e5 is even more powerful, leading to 11... dxe5 12 fxe5, and you now have a decent looking attack on the f-file. Not to mention that you have now made another pawn island for black, further weakening both his pawns on the c-file. 10 f4 was definitely a better alternative IMO.

Regarding 14 c4. I think better would have been 14 c3. 14 c4 greatly weakens the d3 pawn, and it makes d4 a much better looking square for black. Though, his knight is going to have to work to get there. 14. c3 would allow you to play 15 d4, hoping for an exchange to centralize your knights. His move of 19 d4 shows just how weak you made that square. Having your pawn on c3 would have allowed you to play something like Nf3 (even though this knight has been on this square way too much already), thus leading to a winning exchange on d4, as well as a fork on the e5 and d4 pawns.

Looking at 20 c5, I think you should be trying to develop your knights to take advantage of the cramped position. I think 20 Nb3 leads to good counterplay for white. 21 Nc5 can be further backed up with Nc1-b3. The rook can be safely kept from danger I think, after h5, then Rh4, with Nc5 coming up next, further protecting the rook from the queen.

To sum it all up, I think you should look at a few openings and look for the logic behind them, and apply these to your game. Watch your pawn moves. Try to keep them limited to when you can apply pressure, such as with f4. Also, don't attack prematurely. Attacking that f-pawn with just two pieces early on may work against very low-skill opponents, but better players will fend it off while gaining tempo and development.  Lastly, remember the following quote, which is one I actually base most of my play around "Often times the threat of a move is more powerful than the move itself". Think about that every time, before you make an exchange, such as a bishop for a pinned knight. The bishop is performing a function (pinning the knight and covering multiple other squares), whereas the knight's purpose is greatly diminished as it can't do anything at all. No reason to trade the Bishop for the Knight until it is the last chance, or it is part of a great combination.

Hope some of this helped. :)

Why resign?

i didn't know how to continue and my kingside was open

thank you for your analysis Lurker 87.

i realize now that i might have won that game

i did a computer analysis and it found 4 inaccuracies and 5 mistakes

why did u resign i think attacking king side with pawns was good idea

At the time i couldn't figure out how to continue.

OK thanks tonymtbird 

A bit?

Even a GM would resign much later. you don't give up when you're worse and don't know what to do. You have to get your opponent to prove he can get a tangible advantage (like a pawn) or winning attack based on his advantage. Even when you're actually losing, you only quit when you're down so much you can't cause any more problems for your opponent and you're sure based on his rating that the position you're resigning in would be a fairly trivial one (this comes with experience). If you don't know what to do, just sit tight or try to create counterplay, but definitley don't resign. Maybe your opponent won't know how to proceed and makes a nervous error or forces things too soon getting you back in the game. I mean even if he played perfectly it's not clear if a win is forced, and he won't play perfectly.

This is just practical advice. As it turns out, you seem to have 24 f5, actually winning! But even if you didn't, the pressure is on black to prove something with his two bishops.

OK, thanks Elubas. Guess i shouldn't resign unless i am at a serious disadvantage and cannot find a way to draw by force.

thanks everyone for your comments on why i shouldn't have resigned.

Like everyone else, resigning here is very premature. I would only suggest resigning if there really is no hope left.

That said, I know how frustrating it can be when I can't think of a decent plan. If in doubt, just improve the position of one of your pieces (here tonymtbird's idea of Nc4-d6 works well), or if you're really stuck, just sit tight, and see if your opponent overpresses.

I guess you could have offered a draw, but the position does look like there's still a bit of mileage left in it - but to reiterate: resigning gets you nowhere!

OK, thanks for your comment nickf001