Please analyze this game:
Analysis
Sort:
Here is the analysis. Sorry for the wait :(
Thanks for the analysis, but I have gotten a lot better since the game and I disagree with some of your analysis:
Thanks for the annotations. My coach says I am 1900 USCF strength now, let me know what you think of what I believe for the moves I disagree on.
I meant Ng4 after Be3. In the Bb5+! Line At the end Nb6 and d5 and black is fine. When I said I hope you looked at 0-0-0 I simply wanted to nkow if you looked at it. I am not saying it wins I am saying if you didn't analyze it you get A-. Also when I said playing for e4 I simply was saying e4 was a possibilty. I hope you noticed the advance left some weak pawns/squares.No Nc5 is actually a premature move.
1900 USCF is a little high I think.
DMGame wrote:
I meant Ng4 after Be3. In the Bb5+! Line At the end Nb6 and d5 and black is fine. When I said I hope you looked at 0-0-0 I simply wanted to nkow if you looked at it. I am not saying it wins I am saying if you didn't analyze it you get A-. Also when I said playing for e4 I simply was saying e4 was a possibilty. I hope you noticed the advance left some weak pawns/squares.No Nc5 is actually a premature move.
I strongly disagree with the first. Every master I know would agree, as well as my coach. e5?! is a well known mistake.
I was just trying to make a point. White is better after Nb3 - much better - but Nf5 is better in that line.
My coach is 2100 rated and rising fast, I think I need more experience vs that opposition but my skill is either 1900 or close it it (1850)
I do not play najdorf. but 1800-1850 is what I think you are
if you do not like e5 then I guess just do not play it. I did not say e5 was good.
5. e5 no. 6.e5 fine.
I never said 5.e5.
You guys can post a game here. I will analyze 5 games in january. In febuary I will analyze another 5 games. Please only post 1 game here until march.