12707 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
faster was21.... Qf1+ 22.Kh2 Bf4 23. Kh3 Qh1#
Even though your opponent was quite clueless on crucial stages of the game, I did like it due to your timely exploitation of every weakness you could conceive during play, with a remark to 13. d5.
here's a game i just played. Can anyone help me analyze it and answer my questions? Thanks
you said "I don't think I was supposed to do that." but it is perfectly okay. It's called the King's gambit accept, I've played it a few times and had relatively good games, you just have to be careful that you can still develop. The point is for white to have you waste a turn by taking it, so that he can develop before you.
@ Gump - yeah nice triple fork there. I thought your pawn was hanging for a while and you maybe should have defended it with 7. bf4 - his b6 seemed a waste of time.
He definitely shoud have taken on e5 with his knight when your queen attacked, thereby chasing your queen too.
Yes, I was playing a three minute, and I'm not so great on short time, so I missed the hanging pawn until I looked back on the game. I was surprised he didn't take it though
comments in the game,.. :)
Thanks a bunch for these comments mate i really appreciate your effort :>There are 2 things i want to explain though.The reason of ..10Bxc3 was to eliminate the only defender of the e4 square.(I used it for my white bishop in future)And i believe 15Qg4 was a good move all he had to do was to retake my queen with his knight.As i said i would still be up both in material&position but there would be much play left.Thats what i think atleast, would like to hear your opinions bout it :>
The Queen trade just puts a damper on whites chances to create complications. there was no need. granted the ?? is probably an overstatement but it was to make a point white is stuck with a passive position even after Nxg4 and no way to generate counter play.
Your idea to gain control of the e4 square is good but I think that its not necessary to jump on that so quickly. you had other ideas to pursue that could have kept the bishop pair.
check out positions in the french and queens gambit where players jump on the pawn doubling and how a strong player plays the position. the weakenesses on the kingside arent going away and can be used later ..
Any one have thoughts on this game
Here's one of my (rated) OTB games I've played under long time controls (2h/40+1h) in 2005.
A Dutch Stonewall example where White castled to the queenside, and how I dealt with this situation as Black. This doesn't happen too often in the Dutch Defence, but sometimes White players just don't want to castle to the kingside, where Black [i]usually[/i] attacks (not here).
I've added many comments to many moves, why I played them or why I thought they were suboptimal. It's only my amateurish (~1850) comments, so on some occasions my comments may be wrong. Hopefully some of you can still learn something (e.g. if you're a Dutch player, too, or - if you're a queenside castler against the Dutch - what White should [i]not[/i] do). I must admit that I'm not 100% certain myself where White had played such a severe blunder that their position became so bad in the end, except maybe 19.b3?.
Have fun :)
can someone analyse post 989 for me
As you mentioned, 4.Nxe5 was a mistake. Also, keeping the d7-pawn pinned was not worth sacrificing a knight, as Black could have played c6 anytime after move 15, which would have broken the pin. If Black had not played Ng8 on that move (which allowed 16.f4), then you would have had difficulty getting an attack.
Your opponent spent too long with his pawns and did not develop quickly, this shows he was probably less than 1750
we both are deffinately less than that, if it were any other day I would have, most of my games my pieces are out by move ten
really my longest was a tournament were it reached move81
Crazy Move in Grunfeld! How to beat this annoying line?
by socialista a few minutes ago
capablanca gets defeated by "unknown"
by rajnikant001 a few minutes ago
Sicilian: Najdorf, Argentine trap
by bhenderson001 3 minutes ago
3/11/2014 - Too Much Attack, Not Enough Defense
by diamondaxe 3 minutes ago
Why chinese guys aint tolerant?
by steve_bute 3 minutes ago
Validity of stalemate rule discussion!
by Frantisek 5 minutes ago
by isauro2013 7 minutes ago
Making the Chess.com Forums Better
by Mitch_Schwartzen 8 minutes ago
Stuff Non-Chess Players Say
by akafett 9 minutes ago
Q about the tactics trainer..
by fennaklempa 15 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2014 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!