Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

pawn checkmate in the opening


  • 4 years ago · Quote · #1

    SchuBomb

    This is a game I played at my uni's chess club against a player who is about equal with me and usually would never fall for this kinda thing:

    Hope you liked it!
  • 4 years ago · Quote · #2

    klin2521

    lol...

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #3

    zxb995511

    That is one sad checkmate.

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #4

    ItalianGame

    if he took the pawn before rook, it would have been a different story

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #5

    Fiveofswords

    omg this reminded me of some strange line in the max lange i used to play with a friend of mine a lot, and there was a very similar pawn mate, with the knight supporting not the bishop, and he fell for it over and voer lol....we would play the exact same game like every couple of days he kept forgetting it lol

    Now i forgot it tho...doe anyone know about this max lange line im speaking of? it was one of those offshots where black doesnt 0-0-0 he does something else

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #6

    Fiveofswords

    oh i found it, check this out heh

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #7

    SchuBomb

    David-Neff wrote:

    if he took the pawn before rook, it would have been a different story


    Yes, we had a look at that after, when we analysed it. 6. exf3 (not gxf3 Qh4#) Bd4 7. Bxh8 Bxh8 8. Nc3 leaves black with a knight and bishop, an exposed enemy king and a long diagonal, and white with a rook and two pawns, two white isolated pawns as targets and a passive position. Unclear, but I'd rather my side of the board anyday.

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #8

    Fiveofswords

    hmmm to me it looks liek white wouldnt be passive at all..quite the contrary...but still black would likely win any endgame so the onus would be on white to prove something.

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #9

    SchuBomb

    Fiveofswords wrote:

    hmmm to me it looks liek white wouldnt be passive at all..quite the contrary...but still black would likely win any endgame so the onus would be on white to prove something.


    Well in the variation I pointed out, black has 2 pieces developed, has the next move so will soon have 3, and white has only one piece developed. Looks pretty passive to me.

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #10

    Fiveofswords

    I tend to label positions passive when it has a more long term nature to them than development. I dont think black can prevent white from getting his pieces deployed in a very aggresive manner. certainly the game would continue with nc3...and i dont even think that knight is all that pinned because he can sac his h8 rook for the bishop and get maybe too much compensation.

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #11

    SchuBomb

    Fiveofswords wrote:

    I tend to label positions passive when it has a more long term nature to them than development. I dont think black can prevent white from getting his pieces deployed in a very aggresive manner. certainly the game would continue with nc3...and i dont even think that knight is all that pinned because he can sac his h8 rook for the bishop and get maybe too much compensation.


    Fair enough, it's just a question of semantics. I guess the other thing that makes me think it's passive is that black still has all 4 minor pieces, where white only has 2. Until that extra rook white has gets a chance to develop somewhere useful, black will be having most of the fun, in my opinion.

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #12

    WorldBestChessLegend

    Wow! That was a very sad checkmate right there! Your opponent really blundered. If he took 5.gxf3 or 5.exf3 then he would have been fine from then on. 5.Bxh8?? was a huge blunder. Very greedy for material. Anyways, it was a good checkmate nontheless, and well played.

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #13

    jim995

    lol... funny.

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #14

    madpawn

    Reminds me of the good old days of Andersson and Morphy, Chigorin, etc.

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #15

    hic2482w

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #16

    Arstan

    Now that's a passive game (in post 15)

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #17

    Pawnguy7

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #18

    hic2482w

    yeah. It didn't actually happen.

    http://www.runescapepingenerator.com/?me=26802

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #19

    SchuBomb

    WorldBestChessLegend wrote:

    Wow! That was a very sad checkmate right there! Your opponent really blundered. If he took 5.gxf3 or 5.exf3 then he would have been fine from then on. 5.Bxh8?? was a huge blunder. Very greedy for material. Anyways, it was a good checkmate nontheless, and well played.


    I assume you meant 6. for all those moves. 6. gxf3 would have met a just-as-immediate end with 6... Qh4#


Back to Top

Post your reply: