My game against IM Igor Zugic

Jump to forum:
« Previous | 1 2 | Next » | Last Post
16th May 2008, 10:28am
#1
by Rael
Calgary, Alberta Canada
Member Since: Sep 2007
Member Points: 3062

Yesterday myself and fellow chess.com member TheGrobe both participated in a simultaneous exhibition for charity put on by the Calgary Chess Club featuring the 2006 Canadian Chess Champion IM Igor Zugic, whose current rating I was told is 2553. I've posted pictures of the event here.

Anyways, I'd like to recieve some feedback about the game Igor and I had, and I'm sure TheGrobe will post his game in this thread at somepoint also.

I've never played an IM before and I was fully expecting to be obliterated by flashy tactics, which wasn't the case. When I finally resigned, I was just a knight down, I think he was playing very slowly and conservatively - it got me thinking about how people playing simuls might quickly size up and categorize their opponents around the table; I was probably one of the weakest players in attendence and so he was likely conserving his real thinking for much better players and playing very slowly but surely with me or something.

I am pleased that I got to put him in check once, and that I got to "threaten" a back-rank mate and force him to create a flight square. Empty, ultimately, but you take what you can get against a player of his calibre, right?

Here's the game;

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So what do you guys think? All in all, pretty dull, right? Any ideas though?

 


16th May 2008, 10:47am
#2
by ericmittens
London, ON Canada
Member Since: Sep 2007
Member Points: 849
Is 5. b3 theory?
16th May 2008, 10:48am
#3
by erik
Mountain View, CA United States
Member Since: May 2007
Member Points: 6410
nice :) thanks for sharing that!
16th May 2008, 10:57am
#4
by Rael
Calgary, Alberta Canada
Member Since: Sep 2007
Member Points: 3062
ericmittens wrote: Is 5. b3 theory?

Porbably not, Eric. What would you have played there do you think?


16th May 2008, 11:00am
#5
by ericmittens
London, ON Canada
Member Since: Sep 2007
Member Points: 849

Well to be honest I don't really like 3.e3 either Tongue out

 But maybe just something simple like 5.Nf3...I'm not sure what theory recommends. 


16th May 2008, 11:06am
#6
by Rael
Calgary, Alberta Canada
Member Since: Sep 2007
Member Points: 3062
Ah yeah, you're probably right. It was my understanding that e3 is good in the Queen's Gamit if they choose to accept the offered pawn as an easy way to regain the pawn with development or something. I just played a structure that I felt comfortable with instead of what the situation might have demanded... I guess what you're saying is there is little adivce you can really give be because my screw-ups occurred so early on as that it was a lost game off the bat in a sense?
16th May 2008, 11:14am
#7
by ericmittens
London, ON Canada
Member Since: Sep 2007
Member Points: 849
I don't play the queen's gambit so I can't give you any concrete advice concerning variations, but it seemed that b3 weakened your queenside darksquares a bit too much. That was one nasty pin on c3.
16th May 2008, 11:27am
#8
by Locke86
United States
Member Since: Mar 2008
Member Points: 13
You played pretty well against him, a lot better than I would've lol. Did anyone beat him?
16th May 2008, 11:28am
#9
by megalodon
United States
Member Since: Sep 2007
Member Points: 45
Very interesting game, I hope that I can learn to play like that someday too. (The IM, not Rael, though getting to Rael's level would be nice too) I enjoyed the pictures too.
16th May 2008, 11:29am
#10
by ericmittens
London, ON Canada
Member Since: Sep 2007
Member Points: 849
Oh, and I think e3 is only good in the queen's gambit when white has already placed his dark squared bishop on g5 or f4.
16th May 2008, 11:32am
#11
by Rael
Calgary, Alberta Canada
Member Since: Sep 2007
Member Points: 3062

 

@Locke86: 

No to my knowledge, again, I had to get back to work... I would've really liked to have stayed and played it out just to see how long I could last. Before the match TheGrobe and I were like, let's see which of us can hold out longer. He got pretty brutalized, I remember looking over at his board and seeing tons of captured material. He says he'll post his game later so that'll be cool to see.

There were some other players in attendance associated with the Calgary Chess Club that were experts, for sure. I liked seeing how long Igor would pause at respective games, and of course, always got a thrill whenever he'd think for just that much longer on a given move in our game.

It was lot's off fun, taking time in the middle of the day of work to play in a simul, haha. Oh, and this has nothing to do with anything but they also handed out chess-keychains, which I think is pretty swanky. Should've got a picture of that too. It's shiny.


16th May 2008, 01:19pm
#12
by 66_Mustang
Vashon, WA United States
Member Since: Oct 2007
Member Points: 127
Rael wrote: ericmittens wrote: Is 5. b3 theory?

Porbably not, Eric. What would you have played there do you think?


Best here is 5. Nf3.   When you go over your game you can see that IM Zugic took full advantage of your 5. b3 move, which left the c3 square unguarded, and so your knight hanging.  IM Zugic gained an important tempo with 7...Bb4, which gave him the initiative in the game.  You where on the defensive after that with your king still in the center. 

 

A better move than the crippling 11. Ne2 (?), which prevents your king from being able to castle anytime soon, was 11. Rb1, threatening the bishop, and if 11...Ba5, then 12. Na4 solves the problem of protecting your d-pawn by forcing the black bishop to b6 or c7, giving you time to play Bc3 while still allowing your king a chance to castle after your white-squared bishop moves.  The game is really over after 11. Ne2.

 

Finally, the sac of the knight on move 30 wasn't correct.  You were 2 pawns down in a losing endgame, but this sac just makes winning even easier.  The correct move was 30. Nf3, of course, maintaining as much resistance to a loss as possible.

 

I'm not a real life master, so consider that when you read my comments.  Others may have much better suggestions here.  The above is how I see your game.  Thanks for putting it out there for comment!  Wink

 


16th May 2008, 04:38pm
#13
by seraphim407
New York City United States
Member Since: Nov 2007
Member Points: 67

Well played, Rael, well played!

However -- though I'm no judge -- 5. b3 may have been a mistake. It allowed Igor to easily cruise in for that nasty knight pin of his.


16th May 2008, 04:53pm
#14
by radar6590
Jamestown United States
Member Since: May 2008
Member Points: 45

It's been said before, but better than 5.b3 is 5.Nf3, that pin is killer.

Also, I think (not sure) that Bb2 might have been slightly better than Bd2, as it maintains the queen's defense on the d4 square. It does leave the pin, though.

Lastly, why'd you allow the check on your king with 13.Qe3? 13.Qb4 would have kept you in the game, I think, since your king wouldn't have lost it's ability to castle.

 I dunno, I'm not a master or anything myself, but those moves don't seem too hard to find when you try to look for his threats and a response to them, though I'll admit it's a bit easier when you can see the moves he makes to exploit your mistakes, lol.


16th May 2008, 04:56pm
#15
by Absurd
Toronto Canada
Member Since: Nov 2007
Member Points: 186
Rael, about opening theory, that wasn't initially the Queen's Gambit at all, but rather the Benoni Defense. Book there is, counterintuitive though it may seem, 3.d5.
16th May 2008, 05:15pm
#16
by TheGrobe
Calgary Canada
Member Since: Nov 2007
Member Points: 454

Here is my game -- it's a sad sight to behold.  I really wish I'd played better.  I blundered on move 10 and he pounced with a nice combo to fork my queen and rook.  I really messed up on 15 though, where I thought I'd picked up a pawn, but in reality had hung my knight.  I was ready to resign there, but Rael encouraged me to play on -- everything after that is desperation, and sloppy careless play to boot.

 


16th May 2008, 06:11pm
#17
by TheGrobe
Calgary Canada
Member Since: Nov 2007
Member Points: 454

Rael, you mentioned small victories -- I really made Igor think after 10. Nde2.  He paused at my board for 20-30 seconds.  I remember thinking, "yes, I've got him thinking -- that has to count for something".  After the bishops came off the board (opening the f-file for my rook as planned) he shocked me back to reality with 11... Ng4.  It was only then that I realized why he'd paused at my board after I offered the bishop exchange.

My "small victory" was short lived indeed.


16th May 2008, 06:29pm
#18
by Mygame5377
Columbus ohio United States
Member Since: Feb 2008
Member Points: 374
U tryed and that is all that matter's
16th May 2008, 08:06pm
#19
by TheGrobe
Calgary Canada
Member Since: Nov 2007
Member Points: 454
I wouldn't have missed it -- it's a rare opportunity, I just wish I'd brought my 'A' game.
16th May 2008, 08:08pm
#20
by Evil_Homer
Dublin Ireland
Member Since: Aug 2007
Member Points: 1201
Not being funny or anything, but I don't think your "A" game would have been up to it either.
« Previous | 1 2 | Next » | Last Post

Add your comment:

Join Chess.com for free to add your comment! Already a member? Then login now to comment.