Why didnt you take the rook on move 33?
a classic battle for center!
Sort:
hardfighter wrote:
Why didnt you take the rook on move 33?
if i did that, then his queen takes my queen!
Good aggressive play!...
However, white misses the crucial 36. Rc3 which would have prevented much of the calamity to follow... Blunder on his part it seems... Even b4 would have on guarded your queen and threatened the knights defence.
Your opponent only thinks of this move on move 40; I could be missing something here (though I don't think so) but I was surprised that such a highly ranked player would have made such an oversight!
Just my 2 cents...
tarius78 wrote:
Good aggressive play!...
However, white misses the crucial 36. Rc3 which would have prevented much of the calamity to follow... Blunder on his part it seems... Even b4 would have on guarded your queen and threatened the knights defence.
Your opponent only thinks of this move on move 40; I could be missing something here (though I don't think so) but I was surprised that such a highly ranked player would have made such an oversight!
Just my 2 cents...
thanks for your incite.. but 36. Rc3 still loses to Nc2+! cause then i capture his g1 rook! and b4 does the same thing..
My bad, you are right, of course. Well, that being said, excellent work!!
Lots to learn from this game, especially regarding how to keep the pressure on as white!
Well done you outplayed your opponent nicely.
What I don't understand is avoiding the queen trade, you are up a knight trading queens just removes his hopes of any counterplay, Qe5 is a very good move and it worked out well but it seems like avoiding simplification there is pointless.
One other thing, on 36.Rc3, Nd2+ wins, Qxc3 wins, Qxg1 wins, Rxe2 wins, Qf2 wins and probably 10 other moves win as well.
I think that in a very good players hands, particularly when they don't like to exchange queens and are therefore presumably quite proficient in its handling, a queen can be of even greater value than would seem at face value. This game is a perfect example: at move 31. when this becomes the issue, there are no more bishops around. That means that the queens are the only source of diagonal attack left, and thus extremely valuable, even more so than usual.
I know what you are thinking: "yes, that will give the opononent more power as well" , of course, but since the oponent is already behind and can be bullied easily, the added options for mobility will only serve to harass black further - not to mention that later trading of queens is always an option. No, I would agrue that exchanging queens almost levels the playing field further in this particular situation...
A good and perceptive choice to hang onto her @ 31 I say!
Sorry to say this but you have no idea what you are talking about.
The position after the queen trade requieres less thought to win then the one after avoiding the trade.
When presented with 2 completly winning moves chose the safer one..simple no?
Why not make sure you can win the position even drunk for example?
Also avoiding certain trades because you dislike them is a nice way to limit your strength.
Sconsc wrote:
Well done you outplayed your opponent nicely.
What I don't understand is avoiding the queen trade, you are up a knight trading queens just removes his hopes of any counterplay, Qe5 is a very good move and it worked out well but it seems like avoiding simplification there is pointless.
One other thing, on 36.Rc3, Nd2+ wins, Qxc3 wins, Cxg1 wins, Rxe2 wins, Qf2 wins and probably 10 other moves win as well.
Thanks for your incite! there were a couple reasons as to why I didn't trade queens on move 31... 1. If I did take the queen, his pawns would no longer be isolated. 2. His queen is of no threat to me at this point (as you can see he has no attack) and my queen knight combination was in great position for extra material gain!
With that being said, I could have traded queens and still gotten the win, but in that particular position, I found it to be easier to get the win by keeping the queen.
wow that was a very good game! attacking the center led to great tactical play.
glad you enjoyed it shuttlechess92 :)
awesome game
18. g5? should have moved 18. Rhe1, I think.
ajedresdetorre wrote:
18. g5? should have moved 18. Rhe1, I think.
interesting move there! I could still protect the passed pawn further by Nc5. but yes that would be an interesting way to go!
30. Rg4 is a better move being aggressive and at the same time attacking the queen, which will be answered by 30. ... Qe3, forcing exchange of queens if that is White's intention. Or Black Queen will be relegated to the back end.
These comments are just but hindsights, but in actual play, even Kasparov can be amiss. He missed the key move to a mate.
NIce game, though!
Sconsc wrote:
Sorry to say this but you have no idea what you are talking about.
The position after the queen trade requieres less thought to win then the one after avoiding the trade.
When presented with 2 completly winning moves chose the safer one..simple no?
Why not make sure you can win the position even drunk for example?
Also avoiding certain trades because you dislike them is a nice way to limit your strength.
i do agree that it was a better idea to trade queens at that point and make it less annoying for you if it had gone into the endgame, but very nice game and great tactical insight on your part
gg. thnx for sharing.
This is a game I recently completed against a tough buddy of mine on this site. We fought hard in the center. I hope you enjoy! comments and analysis are welcome! :)