Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

My first win over a 1700 player. Would appreciate some analysis


  • 22 months ago · Quote · #1

    theunsjb

    This is my first turn-based win over a 1700 player.  There is still a lot of room for improvement but I managed to keep the pressure on my opponent after a blunder and tried my best to never let go after that.

    The game is from a Benko Gambit themed tournament.

    Looking back at this game I think I my weak spots are still:

    • I tend to ignore King Safety when I'm strong on the attack.
    • I tend to put pieces on useless squares (like the move 17. Rc5).  I still don't know what my idea was with that move.
    • And lastly (but this is perhaps the most important weakness), I seem to get a bit delusional when it comes to the middlegame.

    In my game comments I noted that I thought my position looked pretty decent after 21. Qxd7, but I seemed to have ignored the fact that Black had a Bishop pointing directly to my g2 square and that he has a Rook on the open e-file.  Thus a move like 21. ..Re2 could have been somewhat problematic for me.

    Any comments or thoughts would be much appreciated.  Thank you all!

     
  • 22 months ago · Quote · #2

    Samsch

    Maybe 16.Bd6 might be slightly better than 16.Bb6?

    Nice Game Right There Overall!  Wink

  • 22 months ago · Quote · #3

    Samsch

    And BTW, I could see what your idea was with Rc5. It's not that horrible, you just were trying to add some more pressure to his d-pawn with the wrong piece.

    It was'nt horrible...

  • 22 months ago · Quote · #4

    Samsch

    I also don't get why black played a5. Even if you did'nt see Rc7, you could still just take the a-pawn by itself...

  • 22 months ago · Quote · #5

    Samsch

    I don't think you get "delusional" when it comes to the middlegame, your middlegame is much better than mine Wink

    You were threatining pieces, looking at all possible caputures, looking for good squares to put your pieces on, and as a result (for the most part) you had winning advantage and eventually won the game!

  • 22 months ago · Quote · #6

    DrSpudnik

    Rc5 ended up giving the Rook an entrance to the 7th. One of those long-term brilliancies. Anyhow, Black started a dubious countergambit and was still behind in development when you started kicking his Queen around. But once you got into his position with your Queen, it should have been pretty much over. However, his push with the Rooks & Bishop looked not that bad. Your only esecpe square for the King (move 32) was a dark square, so it could have turned out a little worse had he played Be5 and not offered a Rook Trade.

    The big question is, why did Black trade off when a piece down?? You may as well just resign.

  • 22 months ago · Quote · #7

    theunsjb

    Samsch wrote:

    I don't think you get "delusional" when it comes to the middlegame, your middlegame is much better than mine 

    You were threatining pieces, looking at all possible caputures, looking for good squares to put your pieces on, and as a result (for the most part) you had winning advantage and eventually won the game!

    Thank you Sam! Embarassed But my middlegame play does require a bit of work and I got a LOT of post-game analysis still waiting for me... Innocent

    BTW, I'm keeping an eye on that USCF rating of yours!  Keep well and keep on playing as well as you do young man Smile

  • 22 months ago · Quote · #8

    theunsjb

    DrSpudnik wrote:

    Rc5 ended up giving the Rook an entrance to the 7th. One of those long-term brilliancies. Anyhow, Black started a dubious countergambit and was still behind in development when you started kicking his Queen around. But once you got into his position with your Queen, it should have been pretty much over. However, his push with the Rooks & Bishop looked not that bad. Your only esecpe square for the King (move 32) was a dark square, so it could have turned out a little worse had he played Be5 and not offered a Rook Trade.

    The big question is, why did Black trade off when a piece down?? You may as well just resign.

    Thank you DrSpudnik, and yes, in the end the move turned out alright for me I guess. Smile  But he fought back well and I had to be careful for the most part.

    It was also a mystery to me as to why Black started trading off pieces.  I suspect he was hoping for a draw (or some kind of blunder from my side) at best. 

    Perhaps he was going over my games and he saw my most embarrassing moment on Chess.com just a couple of weeks back where I was way up in material. Embarassed

    I was having a quick coffee break at work, but my mind was not at my games.  A colleague of mine called me over to take a look at something for him, so I sipped my coffee down in one big gulp, had a quick glance at the game, made an impulsive, thoughtless move, just to resign in the evening again after a loud banging session of my head against the side of the desk... Embarassed

    I still haven't recovered fully from this...

  • 22 months ago · Quote · #9

    Samsch

    theunsjb wrote:
    Samsch wrote:

    I don't think you get "delusional" when it comes to the middlegame, your middlegame is much better than mine 

    You were threatining pieces, looking at all possible caputures, looking for good squares to put your pieces on, and as a result (for the most part) you had winning advantage and eventually won the game!

    Thank you Sam! But my middlegame play does require a bit of work and I got a LOT of post-game analysis still waiting for me...

    BTW, I'm keeping an eye on that USCF rating of yours!  Keep well and keep on playing as well as you do young man

    Thank You!!!!!

    And also, do some 20-30 minute Middlegame chess videos here, they REALLY can help!

  • 22 months ago · Quote · #10

    Immoney5252

    [COMMENT DELETED]
  • 22 months ago · Quote · #11

    Immoney5252

    Theuns.....how are you sir.......had an opportunity to look over the game and want to congratulate you on a well deserved victory......It looked as though your pressure really got your opponent on his heels.....especially at #22...


  • 22 months ago · Quote · #12

    Mainline_Novelty

    Samsch wrote:

    Maybe 16.Bd6 might be slightly better than 16.Bb6?

    Nice Game Right There Overall!  

    What about 16.Nb6?

  • 22 months ago · Quote · #13

    theunsjb

    Immoney5252 wrote:

    Theuns.....how are you sir.......had an opportunity to look over the game and want to congratulate you on a well deserved victory......It looked as though your pressure really got your opponent on his heels.....especially at #22...


    Thank you Sal! Smile  Yes, 22. Rc7 was a killer blow with no real defense I'm afraid Cool

  • 22 months ago · Quote · #14

    theunsjb

    Mainline_Novelty wrote:
    Samsch wrote:

    Maybe 16.Bd6 might be slightly better than 16.Bb6?

    Nice Game Right There Overall!  

    What about 16.Nb6?

    Indeed that seems to have been the best move, threatening to take the pawn on d5 on the next move. 

    Thus (just as an example):

    I remember I did consider that move in the game, but I thought it more important to kick the Queen back.  Something to remember for next time, thank you!

  • 22 months ago · Quote · #15

    JG27Pyth

    Lol, just spent half an hour working up a post about how 21...Re2 might have caused you problems... then I noticed your second diagram. DOH!

    The best I can find for White there is 22.Rg5 is there better?  

  • 22 months ago · Quote · #16

    theunsjb

    JG27Pyth wrote:

    Lol, just spent half an hour working up a post about how 21...Re2 might have caused you problems... then I noticed your second diagram. DOH!

    The best I can find for White there is 22.Rg5 is there better?  

    LOL JG27Pyth Laughing  I have to admit that 21 ..Re2 was not my own discovery.  During my post-analysis I was looking at a few key positions with Fritz very briefly and he pointed that out to me.  I guess that is what distinguishes you (a 2200+ player) from me (a 1500 player) Smile  But I will get there eventually so watch out Chess.com players! WinkTongue Out

    I will have a look at your suggested move 22. Rg5, thank you.

  • 22 months ago · Quote · #17

    JG27Pyth

    theunsjb wrote:
      I guess that is what distinguishes you (a 2200+ player) from me (a 1500 player)   But I will get there eventually so watch out Chess.com players!

    I will have a look at your suggested move 22. Rg5, thank you.

    I hope I was clear 22.Rg5 is my thought for white's answer to 21...Re2

    As for my +2200 correspondence rating... that is mostly me maxxing out my rating-to-ability ratio by playing my correspondence games VERY carefully. I've given up playing correspondence because I get too wound up and obessessed. And if I played correspondence chess less insanely, my rating would slip down to where it belongs! Can't have that happening! 


Back to Top

Post your reply: