I know in the game below that I made some serious blunders, but I think I was doing well in the first part of the middlegame. Can anyone here please give some suggestions as to where I made the fatal mistake in the position before everything fell apart? My opponent here is a friend of mine that is a very experienced player and by analyzing this game I think we can all learn from his winning tactics. I didn't even get a chance to attack anything other than a pawn! Good game Deacon21.

Any feedback is greatly appreciated

in move 17, it should have been Ne5. I assume be the right move, if your queen is placed at c7 during your 16th move.

Even after Ne5 he could have captured the knight with the bishop and then later still had Bb5. I think it may have helped though to be more aggresive. I'm also wondering if I should had traded kinghts ate move 12 which would have stopped the bishop attack later on

Your fatal mistake was playing someone 500 points higher than you. :)
Your opening was weak I think. By move 10 you hadn't even castled, lost your f pawn and all of your pieces were locked up.
By around move 16 he had the most of the board controlled with free space on his side. Game was pretty much over by then.
Generally you don't move a piece (or pawn) twice in the opening. You want as many pieces out from their initial positions as possible, and usually (if you could face danger ahead), to castle the king before you start an attack. (Sometimes their development is so slow that castling is a waste of your tempo.) In the game he moves his e pawn twice, but it forces you back and he gets more control over the board.
I prefer to open with e4/(e5 as black) as it allows you to get the C file bishop out and not trapped in early on.

Your pawn gain may have done more to help him as it freed up his pieces for attack, while yours were stuck and blocked in by your own pawns. Considering your position, you probably should have left that pawn be.

On move 3 you placed your knight in a spot that could be easily attacked forcing you to move it to a spot that locks up your ability to develop.


Mind you, I'm not really putting 3 days thought into this.
7. ... f6 bad. (usually) Never move the f pawn. It's the one pawn that's best where it is. Perhaps Be7. Your queen and knight basically locked you from doing much after his knight move.
10. ... Qf7 (try to free up the bishop) Or

10. ...c4 Since your kingside is damaged and unsafe. His pieces are attacking that way. So an attempt to impede his development on the queenside.(If 11. Bg6+ Kd8 to prevent him from taking your rook with knight)

On 13 I would have maybe done Nxb3, To try to fix your position, get your pieces out and protect the king better.
14. ... d4 Regain board control with this one.
17. ...Qc7
21. ...Rf7? That just pins your rook and prevents you from protecting the a8 rook. Also would have prevented the King Rook fork later.
Kh8 and his knight is still hanging. You could aim for Bb7. But you would still be down a piece.
Game was over at Move 22.

The fact you never once moved your light squared bishop, which is a minor piece, and your other rook really hurt your ability to do much. Your position became so cramped early on he was able to control the game.

i know you asked to analyze in your favor, but having the white on bottom i noticed a move that may have benefited white.  please tell me if im correct or not. should white have played 20.Bxh7+? i know it's a sacrifice, but would it have led to 20...Nxh7  21.Ng6, Rxf3 22.Nxe7+, Kf8 or F7 23. gxf3.....does that lead to a quicker lead in material for white?

@chessplayer11  That is a very insightful critique of this game with a very clear explaination. Thank you for your help on this. I know it's unlikely to win against such a higher rated opponent, but that's the best way to learn.

The king would have taken it, not the knight. That would have helped black out.

of course i missed the one move that fixes that...thanks

can you analyze further on that attack though???  it still seems like a good sacrifice.  the knight on f4 has a ton of opportunity

I like to think I'd see that fork coming, but mistakes happen. My opponent in this match, Deacon21 might be on tomorrow to post some comments if you are still tracking then. I've looked over this game so much, I do think f6 was a mistake. In the french defense it's either f6 or c5 pawns to advance, but usually not both, I got fixated on taking that pawn at d4 and then declined the knight trade. I think a better idea would have been to try and advance queenside. That might have helped me to utilize that light squared bishop that was a problem.

20. Bxh7 Kxh7
21. Nxd5 Nxd5
22. Qh5+ (The other knight is still hanging) Kg8
23. Qxd5+ Kh8
24. Nd3
White still has the advantage.

Interestingly the pawn capture, via computer analysis, is the best move at that point. Problem is that it's not terribly obvious why.

I know a computer uses a material advantage or doubled pawns to compute advantage, That's how Kasparov was able to beat Deep Blue at least once was that he tried to play out of opening book move order. Larry Christianisen(mabye spelt wrong) beat chessmaster 10th edition that way too, by forcing an endgame he would have an advantage in. Computers don't see things like ; losing a pawn can open up your line of attack and so it's better for the position after all. That's very interesting to know that I made the "right move" by capturing the pawn, but I still think I should have traded down knights.

@chessplayer11, Deacon21-my opponent in this match has read your analysis and is very impressed with how thourough you were able to explain different possibilities, And I'd like to personally thank you for giving me a different perspective on this game and for helping me to learn from my mistakes here. If we don't analyze our games we progress much slower.

HMM ON MOVE TWENTY FIVE he could have mated you with Bc4+ Kh8 Qxf8# or am I missing something...

No, your right, and during the game I asked him the same thing and he missed that one. Good spot ashlet3544.   .....by that point I was pretty much toast anyways

I think you would have been better off to play less defensive. If you would have played a more traditional and aggressive response, you wouldn't have wasted tempos,ended up with a weakened kingside structure and gotten your queen's bishop trapped. I noticed by about move 14 you transposed to a more traditional position.Imagine the opportunities you might have had if you were able to castle about move 8 or 9 and not had a weakened position.

I realize that it gets mundane and you probably would like to catch your opponents off guard, but my experience is that sort of thing only tends to work well if you have studied your unorthodoxy extensively and if your opponent isn't isn't very experienced. If you opponent is a about master or above, unless he/she is that level more due to memory than calculation ability, your ploy won't work. In saying this, I am not saying that Houdini couldn't have calculated a winning line, but good like out calculating your opponent when you haven't taken away his initiative, while allowing him the added advantage of a better position.

@nameno1had  you're right on about that, I was trying too hard to push things out of opening therory and though it seems to work on opponents around my rating, it was torn apart by my experienced friend Deacon, that's why I'm trying for a group analysis here because winning is not learning and developing a flawed technique is a waste of time against stonger opponents.

Your plan 7...f6 is not bad, but first you're supposed to exchange pawns on d4 (7...cxd4).

Then White can still try Nf4, but this will lose their d4-pawn. However, White can win the exchange after this (Qh5+). Nevertheless, theory considers Black to be better in this variation, so this whole Nf4 line is not popular on a higher level of play. It is a typical variation used by 1800-2100 players who hope that Black won't be able to show their compensation for being an exchange down.

Here the line I'm talking about, which you should have played instead of 7...f6?! (premature)

I still think there is a place in the game for other openings and strategies. Think of them as tools in a tool box. Though you can drive a screw into wood with a hammer, is it really the best tool for the job?

If we go by the logic of my Chessmaster program that seams to have summarized that the King's Indian is the best line for white, should we all play it with white and learn the best lines against it with black, though they lose, hoping our opponent makes an error?

I think you will be a better craftsman on the chess board if you learn how to utilize more available tools and when to try to use them, otherwise the game would really become mundane.