Chess Middlegames

I think this was an instructive middlegame, with coordination of pieces against the pawn of my opponent, I would like you to share your insights about this middlegame, and what would you have done differently.

I have a question, about complex positional middlegames. what is your approach normally in a complex position in which you have to play positionally? it is a thing I struggle with, positional stuff, and I would love any feedback or advice you could give me about it

Not only at your level at any level calculation with evaluation is how we decide if a move is good

If the position is extremely crammed, I tend to sacrifice a piece. It's better to try to win the piece back or find even better moves than try to play something good in a cluster of pieces.

But, my favorite opening is a hyper-agressive gambit, so I don't know if you really should listen to me on that one lol

Actually I play really agressive too, but sometimes they can get something agressive into a closed position, for example in 1.e4 e6 2.b3 it is supposed to be an open and attacking position but they sometimes can sleep the position or when I play with black and then play d4. I appreciate any feedback, and this idea of sacking a piece is interesting

You should try the Halloween Gambit, I'll be making a complete tutorial on it up to move 14 in the very near future.

It is quite dubious but very strong against people who don't know what to do. I have learnt there refutation not fully but i do get a more than decent position out of the opening. It is not good.

I’ve always felt a bit weaker at tactics and dynamics compared to others at my level, but I usually manage to outplay them positionally. There’s a really helpful Chess.com lesson you might want to check out:
https://www.chess.com/lessons/choosing-the-best-move

It’s not a course, so you can access it freely. It’s made for advanced players, and I think it fits perfectly for someone around 2000. The ideas aren’t too simple or too complex—just solid stuff to improve your positional decision-making.

Not many people know what to do against it, and, with enough theory learnt, it is good against people who know what to do. Halloween Gambit is not great, but you can't say it is not good.

But why would someone take the risk of being down a knight if the opponent knows what to do?

Because chess is about fun, just like any other game. I'm comfortable being down a knight, because I know how to get it back sooner or later. Calling Halloween "not a good opening" is like calling the French or the Caro-Kann a bad opening because the position can be crammed. It's all dependant on how much the person knows about an opening. If I know a lot of theory, I can play good with the opening.

At our level, we shouldn't treat chess as a non-stop competition, try having fun next time you play a game.

I like the opening, so I play it and make theory on it, simple as that, no need to only play to win.

That’s a great mindset. EEnjoying the game is super important, especially at intermediate level. The Halloween Gambit can definitely be fun and dangerous if your opponent doesn’t know how to handle it. Just my two cents: as you climb the rating ladder, it might help to also explore some more solid openings alongside it, so you’re ready for tougher opponents too. But if you’re having fun and learning, you’re doing it right 👍

It's too late for me to go pro, so I'm just having fun lol If I was younger, I'd probably have a simillar opinion to imraghav2013, if he's really at 1700 level, I'd say he has a good chance at becoming at least a semi-pro one day, so I can't say that his mindset is bad.

I usually play defensive chess, although I don't like it, because I have the most success with it. I love attacking chess, so I play it mainly for fun rather to win every game.

Man, 1100 is still super early—there’s a lot of room to improve from here. And honestly, you don’t have to be a kid to get better. If you enjoy attacking chess and keep playing, you’ll definitely keep climbing. You don’t have to go full tryhard, but don’t count yourself out either. Improvement’s always possible if you’re putting in the games.

That is true, but I wouldn't want to take risks at higher levels.

(I want to become a semi-pro/pro)