Hello,

 So, what is your longest game yet? I think mine was a 59 move game that I lost, but this is really not that long. I was wondering about professional games and had a look at this http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chesscollection?cid=1002889

The games that interested me the most, are the long games with a winner: Y.Stepak against Y.Mashian stood out, 193 moves with white eventually winning. There was also a long Ficsher game at the bottom, a chance for Fichser fans to check out his greatly spoken about endgame skills.

 But what about you? Do you like long games? or do you get bored if they start to stretch out a bit? Or maybe your the opposite, does a long game make you pull your selves up and really get stuck in?

 Although, I've not really had any real long games, I do tend to like them a wee bit more. I find that I also want to win more-maybe it's a time invested thing, I don't know. Being sucker punched in a 17 game miniature is frustrating-but is losing a 100 move game something else, draining? demoralising?

 Since I have never been involved in such a game I wouldn't know. What's your thoughts?

My longest was the same, 59 moves. But it was not drawn out or boring at all- I had been a bishop behind and I was fighting hard all the way. I won in the end. I don't like long endgames and I try to avoid getting in them.

My longest game in USCF tournaments was exactly 100 moves--where I held a rook + 3 vs rook + 2 ending (fortunately the pawns were all on one side of the board).  Next was 92 moves, where I tried to win an endgame the exchange up (and didn't).  Those are my only two games anywhere near that long (the next one up is 75 moves).  I think my longest decisive game went 72.

I think my longest decisive one was a loss on move 89.

Next was 92 moves, where I tried to win an endgame the exchange up (and didn't). NMTonydal

I think my longest decisive one was a loss on move 89.Absurd

Did you fell that you wanted to win more because the games were long and more energy had been expended, or did you treat it as normal?

 

Well, I'm not a good example to answer that question. I like to win, sure, but I don't typically get hung up on it one way or the other. In that game, I was scraping for a draw and made a mistake, which was a drag after some mostly otherwise decent play.

No, actually I wanted to win just because my opponent was unrated (and I didn't want to let those rating points slip).  Also because it was in a city championship tournament.

 

 

 This is my epic quagmire - longest game I've played thus far. At one humorous point in the game that I'll point out in the annotation, we pre-emptively agreed on a draw and then played on anyways to see how it would go down. I end up winning, but I give her the draw right before the mate. It's like 93 moves. If that doesn't deter you from watching it, I really invite you to. It would be awesome if you saw anything I missed about how I could've cracked the situation open earlier. I tried to include a few ridiculous comments in the annotation, just to make the whole thing more palatable. Closed games are stressful! Enjoy:

 

from the "fireside book of chess"

J.N.Babson composed for Brentano's chess montly in 1882:  Mate on the 1220th move, after compelling black to make 3 succesive and complete knight tours!

Rael. Luckily for you I'm working a 12 hour nightshift on a saturday, so I did look at you 93 move beast (I had no beers).

 

I'm no expert and enjoy a good blunder in most games, therefore, any advise I give should be read, but then instantly forgotten. Anyway, the funny thing was, that you did the things I noticed, but always about 2 moves later-I assume your not an aggresive player, nor I'm I.

 

Anyway, here is what I wrote down whilst going through your game.

 

11.Qc2. Maybe e5 instead, Troys development is rotton, this also opens up the kingside.

 

14. d5 allows for Troy to decide if she wants the position open or closed-you're aim could have been to look for ways to force it open-take away her choices and force her to play your game. (is this starting to sound misogynistic)

 

16.b3 and 17 b4 take away the oppertunity to form an attack on the c5 pawn. If they had moved the other way 'a' pawn backing up the 'b' pawn.

 

19.Bh4. Maybe exchance the knight. Don't run-fight. You mention this later, the idea that you should have avoided the bishop pair. Even if you choose not to exchance-maybe Qd2 is an option, although I didn't look at any real continuations for this.

 

Move 24 would have been your first chance to get that pawn on d6. If you had been a bit more aggresive-maybe would not have made much of a difference though.

 

Move 28. Maybe get the bishop check in now, this leaves the g5 open for the queens backside. Again, I haven't looked at any real continuations- could the hanging knight be exploted using my idea and turn thing into a nightmare for you. I just thought that it was a good oppertunity to get another peice into the attack even if it leaves the positon a little edgey for you.

 

Move 38. Instead of losing the knight you love. The possiblity of moveing the bishop off of d3 sticking a rook behind your passed pawn and then push till your blue in the face. If black starts ganging up on your passed pawn, double the cannons. This would make them involved in the game instead of watching.

 

Move 59Qe2. The chance for Qe6+ looks good. This gets a strong peice right up in blacks face. Also forks the weak backwards pawn. Later when you try to move the passed pawn you hit gridlock because of the black bishop. Maybe, if the Queen had been in the end of the board it could have pinned the bishop to the King. Of course, this is easier to say with hindsight. Also, having the Queen up there would have been no picnic, Troy would have gunned for it. Although, I do think that there is some possibilities.

 

On move 68 you could take the Knight created by the forked king and knight (which you do later) I considered the idea of taking the knight then going onto g2 and Queen exchance. Going into the end with 3 passed pawns looked good with no Queens on the board.

 

 Anyway, that is all I saw really. Like I say, it was more passing ideas as I looked at the game, and I didn't follow it through to see if it works. I am certainly no master as this stuff and I'm sure I would have struggled also.

 

One thing that I have been trying to do in my games lately, is not to simply come up with a plan, but complementary plans, the same idea as combining your peices, but it's abstract. Anyway, the point is that you worked hard to get that important d6 pawn in the begining. The plan that follows well with this is working with the passed pawn you created.

O.K, that's all fae me, thanks for contributing Rael.

 

 

 

Chessstudent

Well I thought that it must be rook onto f8 :)

Thanks for your post. I often wondered what people did before television was invented, the answer seems to be 1221 move puzzles, or catching the in vogue plague.

 

Here is a game from the World Blitz Championship in Moscow 2007 between Peter Leko and Ivanchuk, if this game is not an epic I don't know what is.  It's 215 moves long and ends in the most brilliant anti-climax EVER.  I imagine most of you willjust skip to the end, enjoy!!

Broze

That is good man. What impressed me was the way that the bishop, rook, king and pawns worked together, slowly inching up the board. Using peices together is something we all struggle with, to do it for about 150 moves in a blitz, tough.

 Although, like you said, Leko got the best move-what a find!

 

Cheers, min.