what the #$%^was he playing and how did he win?

Please help me make sense of this game I played tonight at the chess club.I had a huge lead in development in the opening due to my opponent's weird opening system, but I felt that I didn't know what I was doing after my 7. e5.  I was white. 

Well, that was interesting. I've seen this opening before, I think it's called "The creepy crawly" opening where black gets a headstart on attacking on the flanks. 

The move 4.c4 isn't really necessary, you could have played 4. Nc3 and have a very strong center, with all your center pawns pushed the c4 pawn becomes a weakness one day.

Also 7.e5, you could have continued development instead of a pawn break too early. You could have controlled the center more here, and 7.e5 looks to be quite in black's favor as you are giving up some central control.

He chose to have a closed game with 8...d5, and begins to attack on the flanks. All your pieces are in center, which is closed, so his attack on the flanks looks dangerous. 

On move 11, you shouldn't have extended the pawns in front of your king because after all, he's attacking on your kingside. You could have kept it under observation with your pieces. 9...g5 looks like a pretty good move though, your knight on f3 was a key defender to the kingside, with the closed center, and black equalizing on central control, your pieces aren't doing much, and can't do much. Even pawn moves here have major drawbacks.

On move 13, you should have recaptured. You shouldn't have challenged with his bishop, black would love to trade and equalize here. You are playing white, you should have the advantage of position and development, so you should have kept your pieces on board as long as necessary. The d4 pawn was left hanging, you could have protected it with the knight after recapture, but because you over extended your f pawn, you left your king exposed. You should be very careful on moving pawns in front of your king.

The trading of queens favors black quite nicely.

You should have traded rooks, yours are connected, meanwhile black's h rook isn't going anywhere anytime soon.

I remember when I didn't castle also, but I realized you should castle. If he keeps his king in the center it is prone to attack, but since he closed the center, his king isn't safe, but white has no good attacks. You could have been more aggressive, and lead to a more interesting game.

He won because you hung 3 pawns and he took them. It's a lame opening by black. There was no mysteriously effective strategy or anything involved with the win. Just grabbing hanging material.

TheR-tist summarized all of the elements that lead to your loss. The one element that he did not cover directly was exploiting advantages in space. Advantages in space are very difficult to exploit for players at your level. Your opponent played the hedgehog defense system. That gives White an advantage in space. As you know there are 3 advantages in chess (time, space and material). What is even more important to know is the difference between static and dynamic aspects of the 3 advantages in chess. Static aspects of advantages are more permanent in nature. Dynamic aspects of advantages are more fleeting and tend to dissipate with every move in the game.

Of the 3 advantages in chess time and space advantages are dynamic. Material advantages are static. Keeping that in mind it becomes obvious that an advantage in space has to be exploited early and consistently in order to convert the space advantage to a material/static advantage of a more permanent nature.

There are well known techniques for exploiting advantages in space. The first is do not exchange pawns or pieces unless it will either increase your space advantage or convert it to a material or an indicated time advantage. The rationale behind this rule against exchanging is that every exchange takes pawns and/or pieces off the board creating more space for your opponent's pawns and pieces and therefore decreasing your space advantage. Second, space advantages have to be exploited throughout the board by alternating attacks against the queenside and then the kingside or vice versa with the ultimate aim of converting your space advantage to a position where your attacking move cannot be defended against by your opponent because the square for the piece or pawn is already occupied byanother of his pawns or pieces. This is the definition of your opponent's lack of space and it's exploitation. The other possibility is to convert your space advantage in space to a material/static advantage or a transitional time advantage.

As you can see exploiting a space advantage is a complicated process and very difficult for the average player.

There are other techniques for exploiting a space advantage. If you would like to know more Regarding your posted game and specific moves please let me know.

He won because you did not try to expoit his mistakes, giving him chances to organize his pieces.

thank you everyone. @The R-tist: was my 10. Nd2 a mistake? You write that my Nf3 was a key defender on the kingside, but I didn't know how to respond to the advance of his g pawn. How could my f3 knight have defended my knigside if it was under attack from a black g4.

@Yaroslavl what you write is very very interesting. How could I learn more from you about converting space advantage. Indeed, I knew I had a space advantage, it was evident, and it is also evident I had no idea how to use that space advantage. I see what you say, that by exchanging I gave him more space, and lost my space advantage. Can you suggest some moves or ideas I might have made that would have exploited my own space advantage? thanks 

Also, to everyone, how could I have not left my d4 pawn hanging. I see no way to defend it. 

1...a6 is a surely playable opening but the follow-up with ...h6, ...d6 and ...b6 is not good. But you should not underedtimate 1...a6 because if you take too much space (4.c4 and 7.e5) black will start a powerful counterattack. I have played 1.a3 in a serious game.

You started out correctly with a good plan. If your oppenent ever plays like that, simply develop your pieces to useful squares. Once you have completed that, you will likely be far ahead in development, then start looking at weaknesses in the opponents position (there probably will be) and attack them.

Nd2 wasn't bad, but it was not necessary yet either. By the time you lost the d pawn I don't see how you could have defended it .. I would have played cxe5 instead of castling.

thank you PsychoChess. yes, I thnk you mean I should have 10.  cxd5. Indeed, the whole point of my c4 was an eventual cxd5, so I paid the penalty for caution when the time came to use it. 

Question to every one reading this:

It looks like black was attacking on my kingside, And my locked center pawns were pointing to kingside, so I was supposed to attack on his kingside as well. What does strategy say about when both players are attacking on the same side. Are there any general rules about such things?

A very general rule is that whoever pushes their pawns first wins, i.e. the first one to mount a decent attack ought to win.

On move 9 or even 10 your c pawn should have captured his d pawn. Usually people that like closed games will get flustered if you open it up, especially with their King still in the center. His g pawn push was premature, and very risky, because of your d3 Bishop, and Queen battery on c2. Also he probably would have captured your d5 pawn with his e6 pawn, so you could push you e pawn to e6. Take a look at that position, it looks good for you. Maybe not out right winning, but it does increase your attacking chances, and opens up the center when he is hardly developed, and his King is still in the center.

The opening isn't that bad really.

oh wow, this is just excellent, excellent. CrimsonKight7 and Jaglavak!!. Jaglavak!! I went over every single move and comment you made. Excellent, excellent. Thank you thank you. I can imporve. I can definitely learn these lessons you teach. I thank you soo much. I will go over this little bit of coaching again this evening. I am so grateful. Everything you say makes so much sense. playing by theories instead of by targets. Being correct in fretting about whether to take with bishop or rook, but making the wrong decision because of lack of target consciousness. Perfect. 

Your comments show target consciousness perfectly. You are bullseye with your comments. I thought long about e5, and never ever had a good reason to do it. I believe that c4 was not an error, but e5 and the others you mention...bullseye. I'll be looking for you when I play some more games and post one. 

Thank you my virtual chessic friends. I hope to give you a worthy opponent on the board someday. 

This is profound instruction, and which corresponds perfectly with what I know from my career, which I will not mention here but which perfectly corroborates what you write here. Thank you for your humble wisdom. The issue of whether to take on f4 with the bishop or the rook sums it up concisely. I took with the bishop to give my bishop access to more squares (an abstract positional principle which would make for a plausible story afterward...) but taking with the rook would have involved thinking about concrete targets looking forward. A priceless lesson...

The thing is, with his uncastled king, you should have went ahead and played agressively (bringing in attackers, checks) but he decided to close the center, and with the flanks well defended, it's not very easy to move around. You could have went for pawn breaks. cxd5 looks a bit promising.

The 10.Nd2 can't really be called a mistake because you are keeping your knight away from danger.

You could have anticipated for that g4 maybe a couple moves earlier, and diverted to a pawn break and start making your pieces come to life.

Somebodysson wrote:

@YWaroslavl what you write is very very interesting. How could I learn more from you about converting space advantage. Indeed, I knew I had a space advantage, it was evident, and it is also evident I had no idea how to use that space advantage. I see what you say, that by exchanging I gave him more space, and lost my space advantage. Can you suggest some moves or ideas I might have made that would have exploited my own space advantage? thanks 

_____________________________________________________________________________________

The best way to answer your questions is to analyze the game you posted. Beginning with your move 3.Nf3?!, better is 3.f4. The reasons that 3.f4 is a better move is because control of e5 with your pawns is more important than developing you N to f3 which establishes control over e5 but does not accentuate and begin to secure your space advantage. If Black continues as in the game with 3...d6 then 4.Nf3. After 3.f4 Black cannot break the grip of the space advantages created by the 3 pawns at (d4, e4, f4). If you would like to know the details of why 3.f4 is better than 3.Nf3 please let me know.

After 4.c4 Black can transform your space advantage to a Maroczy Bind. The Maroczy Bind is a form of slight space advantage that gives Black many ways to defend against it so the position is almost equal with a slight pull for White.

7.e5?! Is a premature attempt at a pawn break. The reason it is premature is because Black not indicated with some additional moves how he will be defending against your attack in the center. In other words, you pawn break with 7.e5?! has to be prepared. Think of it as a process of suffocating your opponent's position made possible by your advantage in space. When you eventually play the pawn break in the center, any response your opponent chooses will lead to advantage(s) for White. A better move than 7.e5?! Is 7.Bd3 followed by Qd2 and eventually connecting your Rs with 0-0 or 0-0-0.

Better than 11.f4?! is 11.cxd5 because if 11...exd5 the center remains blocked which maintains your space advantage, and you have a half-free protecteda passer pawn at e5. In addition Black's B at b7 is blocked by his own pawn at d5. White also has a half open c-file which later may be exploited. If 11...Bxd5 12.Nxd5 exd5, the center remains blocked maintaining your space advantage, also you have now gained the minor exchange(N for B), you have the additional advantage of the powerful weapons of the 2Bs. Finally, you have the half-open c- file which you may exploit later. If 11...Bxd5 12.Nxd5 Qxd5?? 13.Be4 you have skewered Black's Q and R gaining material with no compensation for Black not even compensation in the form of counterplay.

If you would like to know more please let me know.

Yaroslavl, you write a lot here. You had me at 3. f4 instead of Nf3. Is 3.f4 a better move because of Blacks's two preceeding moves, i.e. a6 and h6, and since he hasn't claimed anything in the centre it is safe for me to f4, because there's no risk of my f pawn being taken by an advance of his e pawn or g pawn, since neither of them have moved yet? Is that the reason? Normally, I think, f4 only makes sense as part of a King'gs Gambit, or as a move to launch a pawn attack on the kingside. Is 3.f4 a good move precisely because of his two previous moves, which allow me to stat the advance of my f pawn?

About the Maroczt Bind, I've seen it written a  few times, and I'm going to read up on it before I ask you any more about it right now. But I think what you're teeling me is that 3.f4 is better than my 4. c4. i.e. if I want three pawns on the fourth rank they should be d,e, and f, not c,d, and e, given his two opening moves. Is that correct?

Did you by chance played TheARBChessSystem? Like in person?