Well...perhaps you were too greedy. Inaccuracies settled the game in your opponents favour...and then there was your blunder(s). I don’t think that you were ever winning, because you didn’t have much control of the board. I mean, you did have one nice file, but you didn’t use it. Nonetheless, nice game! I also notice that your opponent is 500 points higher than you, so good game. 😊
WilliamShookspear's OTB Game
Sort:
cyboo wrote:
Well...perhaps you were too greedy. Inaccuracies settled the game in your opponents favour...and then there was your blunder(s). I don’t think that you were ever winning, because you didn’t have much control of the board. I mean, you did have one nice file, but you didn’t use it. Nonetheless, nice game! I also notice that your opponent is 500 points higher than you, so good game. 😊
I think the assessment that I didn't have control of the board is a bit off when you look at his pieces and where they can go; I had lots of control everywhere except where my king was!
You're right that I should have used the d-file, in 24.Rxd6, crashing through and forcing trades. But I think I had a pretty comfy plus for most of the game until my king safety fell apart.
I can relate to your last post, Skye. After reading your detailed analysis, I went over the game again and saw it in a completely new aspect. Wow. Thanks!
DeirdreSkye wrote:
Here are some thoughts on the game William.
First I want to say that was a tough game against an obviously tough opponent. In analysis everything seems easy but I can understand the stress of a real game against an opponent like him.
Now some thoughts on the game
10...0-0
At this point you should take a deep breath and think your long term plan after first determining his counterplay. This is where you decide if you will castle long or if you will play a4 and where your pieces belong.
You have an obvious positional advantage. The best you can do is reduce any form of counterplay. His counterplay is either that attack on q-side or the square d4 , the only central square he can use for his pieces. Some other thoughts about his counterplay have to do with his bad bishop: Preventing e4 is obviously necessary.
The problems start with the over-ambitious 11.Qf3 which ignores the fact that Black can play Nd4 with tempo and continues with 12.0-0-0 which ignores the fact that Black can now advance th q-side pawns and attack your king.Overall instead of reducing his counterplay you just offer it on a plate. Without your king on q-side, Black's attack on q-side was pretty much harmless and you would have easy defense.
20.Rhd1?
Nevertheless and despite the wrong decisions you could still get an almost winning position after the simple 20.c4 since 20...a4 doesn't offer much(21.bxa4 Rxc4?? 22.Nxf6+). At this point it is obvious that you are too preoccupied with your plan and you miss simple moves.
22.R1d3
He offers you a5 but you don't take it. Why?
23.Qd1
Again , why not 23.Rxa5
33.Nc3?
His sacrifice was wrong and you are winning after the simple 33.bxc4 and after 33...Qa4+ 34.Rb3! Qxc4+ 34.Nc3 and white has everything well covered.I am quite sure that you missed that the rook from g3 could defend on q-side.
Ok , good news and bad news.
The good news, he didn't win because he was better , he won because he was more experienced. You rather lost this game than he won it.That means you are much better than your rating.
The bad news. You need games , you lack the necessary experience to understand when it's time to plan long term and your opponent's bluffs are working too easily(he gave twice a pawn and once a rook and you took nothing). You don't look at all the board when you calculate and you are too preoccupied with your plan and you don't adapt to the needs of the position.
More good news. A very instructive game. I would keep it in an archive and look at it once every 2 or 3 days. It reveals at least a couple very important problems in your thinking process.
I couldn't stop a grin from spreading over my face as I read this summary of my play, which pretty much addresses everything that has been annoying me most. I have had many clashes with this opponent, and I've been breathing down his neck longer and longer before caving. I've never won, and all the games we've played recently have looked something like this.
You're right, of course. I scare too easily, and I'm coming to know this.
I realized after the game that I didn't know what I was thinking, which was a tipoff that maybe I could improve on that.
By the way, I didn't see the free pawn on a5. As you mentioned, I was too focused on my own plan to see anything.
I've got an OTB tournament coming up, so your insights have been very helpful, and I will try to see what I can do... How do you recommend I best incorporate "calm thinking", as doltish as that sounds, into my gameplay?
DeirdreSkye wrote:
Calm thinking!
Not easy , it needs experience. The rule of the thumb is , when the position on the board seems to change direction , it's time to take a deep breath, maybe close your eyes for a few seconds and relax. So if at a point you feel that the position is bad , it's time to relax and see the position from a new perspective or at least try. The same if you feel the position is winning as often over-confidence can be as disastrous as dissapointment.
Many times our mind tends to present things much worst or much better than they really are. You need to look at the position like you are analysing it in your home and not like playing against an opponent. That's easier said than done but it's certainly doable. I had the same problem but eventually I managed to be calm and emotionally unaffected during all the game regardless of the position.
By the way according to cognitive scientists chess expertise is directly related to the ability of the player to control his emotions so it's one of the most important skills of a chessplayer.
I will keep it in mind, thank you Deirdre...
I am, as these things go, quite an emotional person. So won't master it overnight. And I think different things work for different people. But I'll tool around and see what works. Knowing what I'm thinking should be a good start.
Can't fix something that you can't see, I suppose.
Oct 5, 2018
0
#8
Wow, you played pretty well I think.
Two things that stick out to me:
1) I feel like you were maybe changing game plans in the middle of the game, or at least having some trouble clearly defining what each player wanted. Mostly that's just inexperience I think, but it's still important to talk about.
2) Just some minor technical ways of thinking to help avoid some types mistakes like Nxd6
After that, the defense was tough. Low on time it would be hard to find the best moves for sure.
So I think identifying early that the middlegame was going to be more about things like the d5 square, the backward d6 pawn, the light squares, the f6 bishop, etc. would have helped you choose to castle kingside.
Or, maybe you knew that all along, and didn't realize it was possible for black to attack on the queenside. Either way now you know.
That and thinking in terms of not blocking friendly pieces. I actually made a blog post about how to rank your pieces.
Farm_Hand wrote:
Wow, you played pretty well I think.
Two things that stick out to me:
1) I feel like you were maybe changing game plans in the middle of the game, or at least having some trouble clearly defining what each player wanted. Mostly that's just inexperience I think, but it's still important to talk about.
2) Just some minor technical ways of thinking to help avoid some types mistakes like Nxd6
After that, the defense was tough. Low on time it would be hard to find the best moves for sure.
So I think identifying early that the middlegame was going to be more about things like the d5 square, the backward d6 pawn, the light squares, the f6 bishop, etc. would have helped you choose to castle kingside.
Or, maybe you knew that all along, and didn't realize it was possible for black to attack on the queenside. Either way now you know.
That and thinking in terms of not blocking friendly pieces. I actually made a blog post about how to rank your pieces.
Thanks Farm_Hand, that was really helpful!
Especially when you pointed out that Nxd6 "blocks three of my own pieces without doing much" my understanding of the position changed slightly.
Thanks!
Hi guys,
Last night I played an OTB game at my local chess club. The time control was 60 + 30, and I think I did pretty well, but I didn't take enough precautions and wound up getting demolished, despite having a superior position.
My opponent is somewhat dubious positionally, but makes up for it with his sheer tenacity, and his dangerous vision. Let's see how it went down...
This was a frustrating loss, but I learned lessons from it.
#1. There was no need to castle Queenside. I wasn't going to shunt pawns up on the kingside, so I could easily have castled there. This was erroneous decision making.
#2. I had all the time in the world after move 9. Surely I could have made time for prophylaxis.
#3. It is coming to my attention how important it is to be conscious of your own thought process, funny and elemental as that might sound. I see so many people at tournaments looking at the board in the haze, looking and feeling like they're thinking but in actuality, they're just wasting time looking at the squares. I've found the same tendency in myself, and became aware of it in this game.
Thoughts? Additional things I may have missed? Please do say so if you have something to say