Jan 2 Self-Analysis of 2017 01 01 Game 1

BobZimmie
BobZimmie
Jan 2, 2018, 5:45 PM |
0

Okay, in accord with my NYResolution Rule # 2, this is a Study Day not a Play Day.  So looking at my archive, on Monday 1 Jan I immediately see the following. played 8 games of 10-minute chess. I won 3, lost 4(losing some purely on time), and drew one—so 3: 4: 1.  I started out at 1221 and ended at 1203.   My opponents were mostly in the 1200’s. 5 of the games lasted under 31 moves, two lasted 47 and 56 moves.  Not sure what all this tells me.  So now I will start looking at the games, using Quick Analysis, to see what I can see. 

 

2017 01 01 Game 1.  Playing Black against “AnUnknown (1182), it looks like I got a win on move 26, possibly because Black, having blundered early and feeling badly behind, resigned or disconnected. In fact I had just blundered myself, and Black, in double check, could have simply taken my knight and almost equalized. Moral 1:  We 1200’s blunder via loose pieces and pawns (see Sillman tutorial).  Moral 2: “Never give up” (I watched a recent tutorial on this two days ago!)

  1. Okay, now starting at ground zero--on a first quick go-over myself, without computer help, I first the following.

0.1  First, I see a somewhat weird-to-me response to my French—apparently “the Steinitz Attack.” Look into this a bit.

0.2 Next I see my blunder on Move 26... was because I did not see the defensive line of fire of my own fianchettoed bishop on b7.  Moral 3: scan (and refresh memory) of the WHOLE board!)

Those are the main things I see on ground-zero go over on my own.  I think the opening was played okay by me, but possibly with some unneeded prophylactic rook pawn moves.

 

Step 1.  I will now have chess.coms Stockfish do a deep (3 minute!)  computer analysis of the game. And first we will always here just—as they say on NPR, “look at the numbers”

Here’s the bottom (top) line from Stockfish:


-2.71

1

5

10

15

20

25

Strength

White

Black

Excellent

15

15

Good

5

7

Inaccuracy (?!)

4

2

Mistake (?)

2

1

Blunder (??)

0

1

Forced

0

0

Best Move

50.0%

44.0%

Avg. Diff

0.51

0.48

 

1.1 So what do the bottom numbers tell me—those Best Move and Avg Diff numbers. “Best move” is I guess how often each side played what the computer says is the best move.  “Avg Diff” is as I recall the average difference, in pawn-points, between the computers move and each sides move.  So it looks to me from Best Move that While played a better overall game...? Ditto for Avg Diff? Hmmm, how does it figure this? )What can I learn from it?)

1.2  Above that, Stockfish gives me Exc-Good-Inaccuracies, Mistakes-Blunders (EGIMP numbers, lets call them) of 15/7/2/1/1—so there are 2 inaccuracies, 1 mistake, and one blunder to look at.  And White’s EGIMB numbers are 15/5/4/2/0.  This last one surprises me: I’d of thought White’s allowing my knight fork was a blunder.  So I will look at these things a bit later. To this end, I will here paste Stockfish’s analysis below.  (Later I will use chess.coms self-analysis module to look a bit at the opening.)

 

It is now 8:43 pm.  I will continue on this game later, but play one 10 minute game before shutting down.

 


Strength

White

Black

Excellent

15

15

Good

5

7

Inaccuracy (?!)

4

2

Mistake (?)

2

1

Blunder (??)

0

1

Forced

0

0

Best Move

50.0%

44.0%

Avg. Diff

0.51

0.48

  1. e4e6 2. e5

C00: French Defense: Steinitz Attack

2... d5 3. exd6 Bxd6 4. d4 c5 5. Nf3Nf6 6. Bc4

INACCURACY (-0.49) A better move was 6. dxc5

(6. dxc5 Qa5+ 7. Nc3 Bxc5 8. Bd3 O-O 9. O-O Nc6 10. a3 Qd8)6... O-O 7. Be3 cxd4 8. Bxd4 Nc69. Bc3 a6 10. h3 Be7 11. Qe2 b512. Bd3 Bb7 13. g4

MISTAKE (-2.50) The best move was 13. O-O

(13. O-O b4 14. Bxf6 Bxf6 15. c3Ne7 16. a3 a5 17. axb4 axb4)13... h6

INACCURACY (-1.50) A better move was 13... b4

(13... b4 14. Bxf6 Bxf6 15. Qe4 g616. Nbd2 Qc7 17. Qc4 Bxb2 18. Rd1)14. h4

INACCURACY (-2.56) A better move was 14. a3

(14. a3 Qc7 15. g5 hxg5 16. Nxg5)14... Nxg4

MISTAKE (-1.00) The best move was 14... Nb4

(14... Nb4 15. Nbd2 Nxd3+ 16. Qxd3Nxg4 17. Rg1 h5 18. Qd4 Qxd419. Bxd4)15. Rg1 h5 16. Ng5

MISTAKE (-3.61) The best move was 16. Qe4

(16. Qe4 g6 17. Rxg4 hxg4 18. Qxg4Bb4 19. Bxg6 Bxc3+ 20. Nxc3 Qf6)16... Bxg5 17. hxg5 Qxg5 18. Bd2

INACCURACY (-3.51) A better move was 18. Nd2

(18. Nd2 b4 19. Nf3 Qd5 20. Be4Qc5 21. Bd2 Rfd8 22. O-O-O Nd4)18... Qe5 19. Qxe5 Ncxe5 20. Nc3Nf3+ 21. Kf1

INACCURACY (-7.59) A better move was 21. Ke2

(21. Ke2 Nd4+ 22. Ke1 Nf3+ 23. Ke2Nd4+ 24. Ke1 f5 25. Rf1 Nh2)21... Nxd2+ 22. Ke2 Nf3 23. Rg3Nd4+ 24. Kf1 Nh2+ 25. Kg1 Ndf3+

INACCURACY (-6.22) A better move was 25... Nhf3+

(25... Nhf3+ 26. Kf1 h4 27. Rh3Nd2+ 28. Ke1 Bg2 29. Kxd2 Bxh330. Ke3)26. Kg2 Nh4+

BLUNDER (-2.71) The best move was 26... Rac8

(26... Rac8 27. Be4 Bxe4 28. Nxe4Rxc2 29. Nf6+ Kh8 30. Nxh5 Rd831. Rxf3)

Play may have continued 27. Kxh2