Forums

Let me analyze your games!

Sort:
MSC157

I have one more ;) Want deep analyze! :)



erikido23
theweaponking wrote:

Okay fair enough, I forgot about the pawn in that line.  Also, I know full well that White can do kingside attacks in the Stonewall.  I realize this idea, and I use this idea.  I've had these attacks succeed, and I've had these attacks fail depending on how my opponent defends.  To illustrate how I view the Stonewall as an attacking weapon, I present this more recent blitz game.

 

 

 

True, I didn't probably play the best moves, but I do understand how the Stonewall can be used for attack.  My point though, is that with accurate play from both sides, a Stonewall game becomes more of a positional struggle than a hack 'n' slash game.  Basically, I was confident in my ability to resist White's efforts on the kingside while pursuing my own designs on the queenside.  For whatever reason, my friend deemed it pointless to try for a kingside attack and so I was unable to test my theory.

 

Anyway, I just think that White's getting a little too much credit here.  Black's got some things in his own hand of cards.  You just have to look for them.

-----------------------------

Chesscom is bugging again..Anyways,  I thought maybe black had chances on the queenside(such as the exchange of bishops idea). 

 

But, from your notes you sounded like u were just going to plant your knight on e4 and wait for white to attack you.  Like I said just thought your maneuver helped white do what they wanted. 

Maybe it wasn't such a bad idea after the exchange of light squared bishops though.  Maybe you could even bat off the attack.  But, the way you were talking in your notes made it sound like you were playing for a draw or loss (while having to bat off what looks like a pretty good-even positionally sound, attack).  Personally I don't like fighting for a draw with no chances of winning.  the knight on e4(what was it 4 moves to get there-with one of them accelerating whites attack).  Once you get the knight there it is attacking c3...But, a long way from really putting any pressure on it. 

Unfortunately I can't show a diagram...But after ne7..maybe just k-h1 for white and then if n-g4 g4 and f5(yes I will sac the exchange again if u exchange with both minor pieces on f5 and then play n-f3.  have I mentioned I am a hack lol.  Although, my instincts tell me there is no way black can come out of this equal.  If you take with the knight first and then the pawn.  Well I think you can see the comp for the pawn )  

If you don't take.  Well, maybe u are trying to still get the knight to e4 but it seems the attack is coming(many different lines which I wish I could post).  f6 (after q-h4 if the black light square bishop isn't pinning it) turns out to be deadly(after an exchange of 2 minors on e4). 

 

StrategicusRex

Against a player infinitely stronger than I, a draw is okay in my book.  Even then, if I manage to screw up a won position or defend an inferior position for a long time and manage to get by with a draw regardless of the opponent's skill level, then that's fine too.

So, I was indeed playing to draw in that game.  Really, I play each game expecting to lose.  Might be a pessimistic psychological approach, but it's what I do.  I take what opportunities come and assume my opponents will find the best move available to them.  I do likewise and that's what makes a good chess game.  Sometimes you move better and win, sometimes you move worse and lose, and sometimes each player moves equally and a draw results.

 

And speaking of inferior positions, I'd like to know why my opponent (White) in this game didn't find a way to bust through the fortress I had constructed...especially after winning an exchange.



erikido23

MSC..still couldn't get into the analysis board...I think it has something to do with the work comp...

 

Anyways, my in depth analysis says you need a boot to the head.  Your welcome 

erikido23
theweaponking wrote:

Against a player infinitely stronger than I, a draw is okay in my book.  Even then, if I manage to screw up a won position or defend an inferior position for a long time and manage to get by with a draw regardless of the opponent's skill level, then that's fine too.

So, I was indeed playing to draw in that game.  Really, I play each game expecting to lose.  Might be a pessimistic psychological approach, but it's what I do.  I take what opportunities come and assume my opponents will find the best move available to them.  I do likewise and that's what makes a good chess game.  Sometimes you move better and win, sometimes you move worse and lose, and sometimes each player moves equally and a draw results.

 

And speaking of inferior positions, I'd like to know why my opponent (White) in this game didn't find a way to bust through the fortress I had constructed...especially after winning an exchange.

 




In the game...white couldn't break down your "fortress" because you were up material.  Go back to counting(although I never really do that in a game much anymore)...rook =5 points(if I remember right lol) and bishop and knight are 3 a piece.  pawn is 1...so knight (or bishop) plus 4 extra pawns equals quite a substantial material advantage

erikido23


An interesting thing happens after b-e2 blundering the pawn....Pretend like the white f pawn isn't there(that is VERY important)

erikido23

oops..the f pawn being there screwed ME up lol...6. 0-0 hangs th ed pawn(bxd4 with check).  But, does dxc work?  I don't know I am tired lol. 

StrategicusRex

:)

 

And I know full well how many "points" each piece is worth.  I assure you that I'm not THAT much of a novice.  However, material means nothing if you're in a terrible position.  I'm not convinced that White had no way to crack my fortress, try as I might to find a defense for Black.

chessgm8

Mate in 2. Hope you find the mate!

erikido23

Oh, didn't realize the rating of your opponent.  Congrats on a draw against a much higher rated player :D

chessgm8

Mate in 17. Hope you find it! Laughing

DrFrank124c

Please analyze this game. I got a draw against someone who was 200 points higher than me. Should I have pressed for a win or is this game truly a draw?



Last_Sire03
frank124c wrote:

Please analyze this game. I got a draw against someone who was 200 points higher than me. Should I have pressed for a win or is this game truly a draw?

 



well you do have an extra pawn... I would have gone for it.

erikido23

You could have played on..But, I think the accurate result is a draw...This is just at a quick glance.  I will try and get some more analysis after the weekend.  But, 31 f5 immobilizes your majority.  Play e5 and create a passed pawn seems much better to me

 

 

Also an interesting possibility is 19 exd5 and giving up the queen for rook and 2 minor pieces (which is plenty of material).  You don't have too many weaknesses in your position(a6, b5 is a minor weakness.  But, seems difficult to take advantage of) so it will be hard for th equeen to create quick threats

Owlmoon

I'm thinking after 19.Nd5 then Bxh2+ 20.Kh1 Qd6. Tell me if I missed something.

Owlmoon
theweaponking wrote:

Against a player infinitely stronger than I, a draw is okay in my book.  Even then, if I manage to screw up a won position or defend an inferior position for a long time and manage to get by with a draw regardless of the opponent's skill level, then that's fine too.

So, I was indeed playing to draw in that game.  Really, I play each game expecting to lose.  Might be a pessimistic psychological approach, but it's what I do.  I take what opportunities come and assume my opponents will find the best move available to them.  I do likewise and that's what makes a good chess game.  Sometimes you move better and win, sometimes you move worse and lose, and sometimes each player moves equally and a draw results.

 

And speaking of inferior positions, I'd like to know why my opponent (White) in this game didn't find a way to bust through the fortress I had constructed...especially after winning an exchange.

 



What's interesting is that after your last move, no matter what white does, the rook pawn on the kingside is enough to guarantee a win for black. White's king is too far away and therefore cannot stop it. Even if it could, black has 4 pawns on the queenside to white's one and black can easily win without the kingside pawn with the bishop + 4 pawns vs. 1 pawn.

erikido23

Owlmoon2000 wrote:At the end of your line n-b6 wins an exchange it seems

I'm thinking after 19.Nd5 then Bxh2+ 20.Kh1 Qd6. Tell me if I missed something.

plotsin

You can go to my profile and check out whatever in my games archive if you're allowed too.

JagdeepSingh
plotsin wrote:

You can go to my profile and check out whatever in my games archive if you're allowed too.

If you want your game to be checked, then at least provide a link otherwise do even bother!

erikido23
frank124c wrote:

Please analyze this game. I got a draw against someone who was 200 points higher than me. Should I have pressed for a win or is this game truly a draw?

 



11.  r-ac1 threatened to play n-d5 which is very annoying.  I don't really see a good way to respond.  There is very annoying pressure on d6 if you take with the pawn and then exchange pieces. The smith morra is more annoying in general than people give credit.  I am not really sure where you went wrong.  But, I think white is better here(but then he missed this idea and allowed u to keep the material advantage with little counterplay).

 

Other than that.  The only other real notes to the game I would give are the ones I noted previously.