That's why I say that sometimes, castling can be a fatal mistake, as this can happen if you leave the King alone.

I'm afraid I cannot agree with you that this game demonstrates that one should not castle. Black's problems in this game have got nothing to do with the fact that he castled. In fact, after 36. Nxb7 I think I prefer black's position. Black is three pawns up and has the threat Bf5 attacking both rooks. Certainly black should not lose from this position.

What your game does demonstrate very effectively, however, is why it is important to look out for back-row mates!! Black simply needs to play g6 at some point to avoid this catastrophe.

Proves nothing but blck played carelessly.

 

While there are those uncommon times where castling isn't necessary, the key to using that very important move is timing...

Castling is sometimes dangerous.. Definitely not because of the game you just posted though.

Agree with others. It was poor piece play by your opponent. 30 ... b5 and you were toast.

As has been pointed out several times, the outcome of this game had little to do with castling. Black had an easily won game and blundered it away. Moral of the story? Blitz chess isn't pretty.

Yep, definitely one of the more irrelevant titles I've seen.

There are definitley TIMES when it is a bad idea to castle on one side, or at all.

Generally, most games it IS safer to castle. I can give you examples of both.

Guys, if you disagree with the original poster, at least give a courteous explanation why, don't be condescending. That should be beneath you.

White should be irretreavably lost after 17...Qxe3. Since that happened before black's mishap, maybe it is showing danger of Not castling too   :) 

The thing is, pawn takes e3 was an error because it shuts down the line of attack for black on the e-file. It is usually (almost always) better to Open lines to attack than to Close them.

It is also usually better to develop fully (or within a piece of it) before intiating any attacks, unless there is an obvious material gain to be made by proceding before that. There should not be tho, unless the opp has erred significantly already.

This game is a better arguement against blitz play than against castling.

It's also an example of why a beginner makes a better student than a teacher.

yes but you didn't have to do some of the last moves

Well, if you explain me why Im wrong I will understand, please notice that Im new to the site and doesnt have too many chess experience.

Also, what's wrong with blitz chess? Is it because the ammount of time is so small that doesn't let you think a lot? I don't really see why, so, again, if someone explains me I will be grateful.

Very well:  Black was winning for virtually the entire game.  Castling had nothing to do with his loss, except in the trivial sense that it can make you susceptible to a back-rank mate (but only if you allow yourself to fall into it!).  Even as late as the 39th move, Black is winning comfortably if he just plays 39... g6 (thereby ridding himself permanently of the one-move-loss problem).