This is my most successful Sicilian game, and the highest rated opponent I've beaten, ending in a nice rook sac.

Of course, I played black.

4....Bg4? should have lost to 5 Bxf7+ Kxf7  6 Ng5+  and  7 Qxg4

Reb is right. Look out for those tactical possibilities. That doesn't make your win very good. plus your opponent could have put up more resistance after 37. Kc1.

Ah, Reb's right. I was impressed with your play until reb pointed that out :P

Reb wrote: 4....Bg4? should have lost to 5 Bxf7+ Kxf7  6 Ng5+  and  7 Qxg4

---

 Well, now that you dashed his ego after he was so proud of his game I am sure that helped alot. I guess thats what it takes to be NM, huh Reb?

Broze: Errors are ok, learn from them. Let me turn this into something you can learn from:

Try to develop knights before bishops and support pieces before you fling them into enemy territory. Always be aware of the f7 (or f2 square) because sacrifices can expose your king. Pins are only as good as being forced to exchange the bishop for a knight, most of the time that's bad because a bishop is a slightly better piece.

On the positive side:

Your handling on the queenside was consistent with overall closed positions for black in the Sicilian. Try to control the dark squares play to the open (or semi-open) c file. 

Fotoman wrote: Reb wrote: 4....Bg4? should have lost to 5 Bxf7+ Kxf7  6 Ng5+  and  7 Qxg4

---

 Well, now that you dashed his ego after he was so proud of his game I am sure that helped alot. I guess thats what it takes to be NM, huh Reb?

Broze: Errors are ok, learn from them. Let me turn this into something you can learn from:

Try to develop knights before bishops and support pieces before you fling them into enemy territory. Always be aware of the f7 (or f2 square) because sacrifices can expose your king. Pins are only as good as being forced to exchange the bishop for a knight, most of the time that's bad because a bishop is a slightly better piece.

On the positive side:

Your handling on the queenside was consistent with overall closed positions for black in the Sicilian. Try to control the dark squares play to the open (or semi-open) c file. 

---

If his ego is that easily "dashed" he shouldnt play chess for chess is a very cruel game. Its better to have someone point it out here than for it to happen to him in an important game. Pointing it out now might make him aware of it the next time such a position appears on the board.

4...Bg4? you were lucky he didn't see 5.Bxf7   but it was good game Broze.Bravo!

Reb wrote: Fotoman wrote: Reb wrote: 4....Bg4? should have lost to 5 Bxf7+ Kxf7  6 Ng5+  and  7 Qxg4

---

 Well, now that you dashed his ego after he was so proud of his game I am sure that helped alot. I guess thats what it takes to be NM, huh Reb?

Broze: Errors are ok, learn from them. Let me turn this into something you can learn from:

Try to develop knights before bishops and support pieces before you fling them into enemy territory. Always be aware of the f7 (or f2 square) because sacrifices can expose your king. Pins are only as good as being forced to exchange the bishop for a knight, most of the time that's bad because a bishop is a slightly better piece.

On the positive side:

Your handling on the queenside was consistent with overall closed positions for black in the Sicilian. Try to control the dark squares play to the open (or semi-open) c file. 

---

If his ego is that easily "dashed" he shouldnt play chess for chess is a very cruel game. Its better to have someone point it out here than for it to happen to him in an important game. Pointing it out now might make him aware of it the next time such a position appears on the board.

---

It is obvious to a higher ranking player, but not to a lower ranking player. Hitting them over their head (while not telling them why their moves are errors) is more likely to dash enthusiasm than teach anything. But if your ego is more important than theirs, go ahead and use your approach. If you want to teach and motivate, I think my methods are more likely to inspire than yours, Reb.

 

Fotoman wrote: Reb wrote: Fotoman wrote: Reb wrote: 4....Bg4? should have lost to 5 Bxf7+ Kxf7  6 Ng5+  and  7 Qxg4

---

 Well, now that you dashed his ego after he was so proud of his game I am sure that helped alot. I guess thats what it takes to be NM, huh Reb?

Broze: Errors are ok, learn from them. Let me turn this into something you can learn from:

Try to develop knights before bishops and support pieces before you fling them into enemy territory. Always be aware of the f7 (or f2 square) because sacrifices can expose your king. Pins are only as good as being forced to exchange the bishop for a knight, most of the time that's bad because a bishop is a slightly better piece.

On the positive side:

Your handling on the queenside was consistent with overall closed positions for black in the Sicilian. Try to control the dark squares play to the open (or semi-open) c file. 

---

If his ego is that easily "dashed" he shouldnt play chess for chess is a very cruel game. Its better to have someone point it out here than for it to happen to him in an important game. Pointing it out now might make him aware of it the next time such a position appears on the board.

---

It is obvious to a higher ranking player, but not to a lower ranking player. Hitting them over their head (while not telling them why their moves are errors) is more likely to dash enthusiasm than teach anything. But if your ego is more important than theirs, go ahead and use your approach. If you want to teach and motivate, I think my methods are more likely to inspire than yours, Reb.

 

---

If you want to let a player be proud of a game that is riddled with mistakes and not point them out then you shouldnt teach chess . I also suggest if you have a bone to pick with me be a man about it and dont take swipes at me in these forums. You are the only one complaining about my pointing out his error, noone else. Perhaps we should let the author of the thread speak for himself ? I have some experience teaching chess and more than 30 years experience in otb tournament play. What are your "qualifications" to scold me for my methods?

Wow guys thanks for taking an interest!!! I partly agree with Reb, those mistakes need to be pointed out and I should imagine that that is a pretty common mistake to capitaliseon so thanks, but I am also looking for CONSTRUCTIVE criticism and marking my positive aspects of play as well as shooting down my mistakes can be just as helpful- (a good teacher would know this). Thanks for taking a look.

benws wrote: Reb is right. Look out for those tactical possibilities. That doesn't make your win very good. plus your opponent could have put up more resistance after 37. Kc1.

---

Also I don't understand what you mean by this benws, 37. . .Qb2# is checkmate for me.

Welcome in Sicilian land Broze and congratulations for your fine rook sacrifice !

However, as Reb pointed, be warned that some white Sicilian players may get your scalp on the road as Sicilians are sharp !

I did not find Reb's initial comments to be condescending or inappropriate at all, but text messages are commonly misinterpreted by the reader.... so maybe .... I could be wrong.

 

Neither did I.  Perhaps fotoman meant benws.  But thanks fotoman, I also understand that the Sicilian is an opening rich with theory so perhaps a bit risky.

Reb just did construtive comments, i see no harm there.Reb i have some games posted, i would thank you if u could comment some.Notice they are all blitz, so quality is not the best

 

Its good to know you can play once the game gets going.  However, if you make bad mistakes in the opening, you wont get there against better players.  So Reb is absolutely right to point out the mistake and I am sure that Broze takes it as constructive.  I can't see the problem.

Ps nice finish

All the less GREAT GAME! Your rook sack showed some real skill!