A "sandbagger" is not an engine user. It is one who has deliberately lowered his rating, for dishonest purposes.
Take his insult as a compliment! 
(as long as you're not a sandbagger)
I've played that pawn-push line a few times but didn't notice the pawn sac (e6). Good game.
A "sandbagger" is not an engine user. It is one who has deliberately lowered his rating, for dishonest purposes.
Take his insult as a compliment!
(as long as you're not a sandbagger)
I've played that pawn-push line a few times but didn't notice the pawn sac (e6). Good game.
Aha. I always forget that. Anyways, thanks (and no, I'm no sandbagger).
i dont know if you play like really bad or good but i really like the way you played. how it seemed like you had the game in total controll and an overall strategy that you implemented well, i cant judge it but it looked very interesting to me
i dont know if you play like really bad or good but i really like the way you played. how it seemed like you had the game in total controll and an overall strategy that you implemented well, i cant judge it but it looked very interesting to me
Thank you :D
Hm, it appears post 3 is ever so slightly ambiguous and somewhat misleading. By making that comment, I didn't mean to imply that I thought a sandbagger was an engine user; I just always forget what a sandbagger is. I know, it's a trivial matter, but I'm and odds and ends kind of person (when I want to be :))
Not sandbagger that's clear:
| Highest: | 1544 (Feb 4, 2013) |
|---|---|
| Best Win: | 1675 |
| Avg. Opp.: |
1384 Member Since: Sep 8, 2010 |
I never realized e6! could be played there! Thank you!
But if instead of h6, and Black played h5, would the e6 sac still work?
Wow! This game was played at an extremely high level! The only tactical idea white missed was 15.g4-g5. That was played by a master in a serious game.
If this was a timed game, white's play was, literally, masterful. If this was a correspondence game, then I wonder why white didn't play g4-g5. Even so, congratulations on a nearly perfect game!
Wow! This game was played at an extremely high level! The only tactical idea white missed was 15.g4-g5. That was played by a master in a serious game.
If this was a timed game, white's play was, literally, masterful. If this was a correspondence game, then I wonder why white didn't play g4-g5. Even so, congratulations on a nearly perfect game!
Really? Masterful? Thanks! I had studied the Caro-Kann extensively because I wanted to play it as Black. Along the way, I stumbled upon the bayonet attack in the advance variation. I also looked at some games of Alexei Shirov and I found this essay on tactics that gave me the e6 sacrificial idea
http://www.chesscorner.com/tutorial/Intermediate/adtactics/improve.htm
This game was a 30|0 game. I'm glad you liked it :-)
Oh, and I was wondering, since I'm always trying to improve: what if Black played 15...Ne4 in response to g5? (or 16..Ne4 should he opt to exchange pawns?) I know it removes the defender of the g-pawn. Is it supposed to trap the rook? I will remember to keep these kinds of ideas in mind! Thanks!
I never realized e6! could be played there! Thank you!
But if instead of h6, and Black played h5, would the e6 sac still work?
The essay I read marked 4...Bg6 as an error. I thought that h5 would be the best move to stop the sacrifice as well.
I was accused of "sandbagging" once, by a guy way better than me and it was the best compliment I ever got. My ego surged, my game fell off....
I'm not talking about 8.e6. That's a normal idea that has been found by all sorts of players, including players rated in the 1300s. I'm talking about the entire game. You found every major tactical idea except 15.g5. You played at a +2200 level in this game! Congratulations!
This is a great game to get analyzed, I like the Caro-Slav. Any interested should check pawn structure 101 caro slav5 by Daniel Rensch, also the link to previous video as well. You can find these in the video section under learning, for anyone newer than me.
I am curious why you didn't castle queen side though. Perhaps you didn't want to activate his rook by playing g5, I don't think that would have helped him though.
SmyslovFan wrote:
I'm not talking about 8.e6. That's a normal idea that has been found by all sorts of players, including players rated in the 1300s. I'm talking about the entire game. You found every major tactical idea except 15.g5. You played at a +2200 level in this game! Congratulations!
Wow.. So it would be fair to say my development as a chess amateur is going well :D?
I have defended against a game like the one you posted. Its not fun for white. Nice game. How I see it that white could learn a few things from the game. He just got his but butt lubot handed to him and he will recover.
I have defended against a game like the one you posted. Its not fun for white. Nice game. How I see it that white could learn a few things from the game. He just got his but butt lubot handed to him and he will recover.
Take another look, at the featured game.
I have defended against a game like the one you posted. Its not fun for white. Nice game. How I see it that white could learn a few things from the game. He just got his but butt lubot handed to him and he will recover.
im not sure, i think the correct defense for black is c5 after e5. i might confuse it, but i think its the correct because it stook in my mind that its ok to lose a tempo like that.
Hello,
I got accused of cheating because of the following game. I don't really think I played that well, but my opponent thought I was using a program and proceeded to call me a sandbagger, which is laughable :). I thought I might as well post it here just to see what you all think. I just happened to know the Caro-Kann a little better than he did. Anyways, here's the game!