We need more amateurs to post their annotated games.

Thank you Glex, You really helped me see some things on the board I hadent been seeing before :) And your explanation on analysis was great :). Here's my analasis of a game I just played. I blundered terribly in the endgame :(

I will analyse it

Black's disaster starts after 13. b4. Trying to capture the knight, and of course few wrong moves leads to total disaster.

hi all here is my most recent win

This game was nearly a disaster, At move 12 I saw I was about to be mated in 1, so I immediately check so he cannot mate me, so I have time to make my escape.

I think we should analyze our losses. More often than not, we learn a lot more from our losses than our wins...

there is nothing wrong with analyzing your wins as well.

I have two games for you guys, i outplayed my oponent in both, but one i blundered into checkmate

Here's one from awhile ago. I'd like some analysis from this one!

I would love someone to analyse this one

is that move really a double exclam mark

Here's an annotated game I played today. I played White in a Sicilian Defense: Nimzowitsch Variation game.

Well played, and annoted well!

Glex, your annotations in the opening into the middle game really interested me and I feel like you may have overlooked many things. You seem to be a very thorough player so you should consider some of these points.

5. Ne4 - can you explain why you picked this move? it seems to me like you are giving away turns for insufficient compensation. Black's c-pawn is his gambit pawn, and moreover it is easily defended by ... e6, where it is defended by the bishop. 
5. ...e6  is actually a very good move. Now your opponent has brought the bishop in (protecting c-pawn), and opened another line for his queen, while your queen is still trapped, only one of your bishops has prospects. On his side: both his bishops are out, one is already defending a piece, his queen has prospects.
6. d4 - This is a logical move, but I still think you are miscalculating the situation. There cannot be a pin on the knight without a piece that is threatening to capture it. Even if things go according to your plan (...cxd4 7.Qxd4) - your opponent can bring out his other knight with tempo to c6, since it is chasing your queen away. Once his knight is there, it can recapture the queen if you ever take the queen, but this is not even necessary because: after your queen moves, he would have many good choices. He could bring out his bishop to d7, protecting the knight from ever being pin-attacked by your c-pawn. He could simply move his queen to c7, which is a good square.

Anyway, after 6. ..f5  this is all irrelevant since that is a terrible move. But you should consider these things about this variation of the Sicilian. If you just spend a few minutes on the position you will see that e6 is a very good response, and that against a better player you would have lost your initiative at this point, and completely given your opponent the initiave if you followed through with your Qxd4 plan.

8. ...Nc6? This would have been a useful move a few turns ago lol, like you say. At this point he could have still saved himself with Qa5+, getting the pawn back and eliminating the chance of your c-pawn attack.

9.c4  In this scenario, your plan of course was successful, but please I want you to understand it was only possible because your opponent made some terrible mistakes. Normally this would never succeed. Sorry!

9. ...Nf6?! Even at this point, it seems to me that he could have saved himself from the embarassing knight re-capture on d8. If he had played ...Nb4, then if you do the queen trade, the next turn you would have to move your king in order to avoid his knight fork at c2!! So you wouldn't have exchanged queens probably, and if you attacked his knight, he could have exchanged your queen!

11. Ne5 is a very good move indeed, for all the reasons you mentioned. A beautiful spot.

13.Nxf7 is a MUCH better idea than f4?!, because if f4, then he could have taken your knight and your poor f-pawn would end up on e5! and you'd be left with an open kingside.


19.g4!? I still have to say that this kind of risk for your king is unnecessary, especially since this game is already in your favor. I know that there is no longer a queen and bishop, but now you have unnecessarily created a backward pawn at f3. While it is good to attack the kingside with pawn, it is not so good if it leaves your own kingside undefended. I also think you could have considered castling Queenside! Then you could have thrown all your pawns at him. Before b3, the queenside was a good spot for your king.



Nice job with the bishop attack calculations and the checkmate at the end. Lol not capturing his rook with your bishop - stuff like that happens to me all the time and I kind of just sit there and say "uhhhhhh....... "   =P

Thanks for your reply! Here are my move choice reasons and comments on my opponent's moves:

5.Ne4 threatens Black's c5 pawn, that Black has probably wanted to exchange for White's d pawn which is safe for now. Chances are that 5.Ne4 may mess up Black's plans, and also gives White the initiative since Black has to reply to threats instead of develop strategically or go for an attack.

5...e6 leaves Black's light squared bishop trapped, because while White has the initiative and plays forcing moves and until Black doesn't move the pawn from e6 (White didn't allow that until 15.Be2, when he already had an advantage), Black can't play the bishop along c8-h3, while playing it at the queenside is pointless because of White's light sqare copntrol there (the a2-c4 pawn chain consequence). Black brought it into play at 18...Bc6, when he already had a bad position. That bishop took no part at the opening, where it could have pinned a knight or done something else to help. Also, Black could have developed his dark squared bishop to g7 to control d4 and e5 (the latter square was very important for White in the game), as well as the a1-h8 diagonal that White played his bishop along in the middlegame, so opening the a3-f8 diagonal was not necessary.

About the queen: I prefer to use the queen as a defensive piece, and for supporting attacks from the back ranks (for pairing in a queen-rook battery or with a bishop ahead, so that I can exchange the other piece if my opponent challenges the control of the file/diagonal), so I had no intention bo bring it into play before my other pieces unless necessary (as when I exchanged it to hinder Black's knight's development). Also, after 4...Nxd5 the d file was semi open, and having a rook / queen on it was useful.

6.d4: Yes, I wrote he should play ...Nc6. But I would play Bb6 then, pinning his knight, and then c4 would have been even more effective.

About 6...f5: It doesn't matter how good the opponent is. At a certain position, it's up to a move choice, and if the opponent doesn't choose well, his overall skill is not important. You have to consider the board position, not your opponent.  "Who is your opponent tonight, tonight I am playing against the black pieces", as Rubinstein said.

Anyway  But how could Black take the initiative after 6...f5?

8...Nc6: Yes, I wrote Black should have played that before he lost a pawn. But 9...Qa5? loses a knight for two pawns to 10.Bd2 Qxc5 11.cxd5 Qxd5.

9.c4: Yes, mistakes are part of chess. If there were no mistakes, all games would be drawn (since a mistake is move that worsens the position by definition, and if the position doesn't go worse for either player, the game is a draw). That's why exploiting enemy's mistakes is how chess players win. There's no other way. This is actually what's "normal" at chess, and that's what every win is based upon. As Bobby Fischer said, "That's what chess is all about. One day you give your opponent a lesson, the next day he gives you one".

9...Nf6: If 9...Nb4, then 10.Qxd8+ Nxd8+ 11.Nd4. If 11...e5, then 12.Bd2. There's nothing for White to worry about.

13.Nxf7: Black could not attack e5 with a piece in case of 13.f4 Nxe5 14.fxe5. Trying to reposition his knight by ...h6, ...Ng5 will result in doubled g pawns for Black after Bxg5, and White will have control over f6 too. That's why 13.f4 should also be considered as a candidate move (although I didn't play it). There are two reasons for not choosing the best move: the first is not looking at all candidate moves, the second is miscalculating the one you play, and both of them are equally important.

19.g4: My aim was to open the kingside (since ...f4? loses a pawn immediately). Then I would have been able to use my pieces more effectively, because ...fxg4, fxg4 would open lines for them. This is what happened after 23...fxg4 24.fxg4 and the resulting piece exchanges and tactical combinations.

two things, would some one analyse the fried liver game i posted, and how bout this one

8. c3 looks, at first glance, antipositional.  You need to develop your pieces, attack.  The c3 square is needed for your knight.  Nc3 is much more natural.  After ...Bd7 his knight on d5 was hanging for several moves, also.