nice Italian game with just a few inaccuracies. 3 min blitz ending in checkmate 1-0. My opponent played 3. …h6 aka the anti fried liver attack which I think is almost always a mistake. This allows me to attack the center immediately with 4.d4 and leads to a position I love to have as white. He also developed his queen way to early which allowed me to threaten a nasty discovered attack on f6 with my light squared bishop and rook. While he dealt with these threats I cleared his dark squared bishop off the board to prepare the pawn storm which lead to an easy to spot mate in 3.
No mistakes Italian game
Sort:
trw0311
Oct 27, 2022
0
#1
Dec 10, 2022
0
#3
1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bc4 Bc5 4 c3 Nf6 5 d3 0-0 6 Ng5 h6 7 h4 hxg5 8 hxg5 Ne8 9 Qh5
This was a game between me and my classmate
Jan 13, 2023
0
#6
DesperateKingWalk wrote:
trw0311 wrote:
nice Italian game with just a few inaccuracies. 3 min blitz ending in checkmate 1-0. My opponent played 3. …h6 aka the anti fried liver attack which I think is almost always a mistake. This allows me to attack the center immediately with 4.d4 and leads to a position I love to have as white. He also developed his queen way to early which allowed me to threaten a nasty discovered attack on f6 with my light squared bishop and rook. While he dealt with these threats I cleared his dark squared bishop off the board to prepare the pawn storm which lead to an easy to spot mate in 3.
You need to check your game with better offerings then the weak analysis you get from Chess.com. You made many mistakes in the game.
Here is the analysis from Chessbase 17 with a Threadripper CPU and the latest update of Stockfish Stockfish DEV 20221209.
Just seeing this now. I think you are way off. I am not a computer. No one is. If i analyze my games with a supercomputer it will be less informative than if I analyze them at low depth; ie I am not ever going to be playing at 3500+ level. Humans simply do not understand these moves and thus they are irrelevant. Unless you are super GM chess.com analysis is sufficient, better yet human analysis.
Edit: how silly is that analysis that white loses on every metric but wins decisively, also in a short time control. I'm sorry but that is totally irrelevant.
Jan 14, 2023
0
#7
DesperateKingWalk wrote:
trw0311 wrote:
DesperateKingWalk wrote:
trw0311 wrote:
nice Italian game with just a few inaccuracies. 3 min blitz ending in checkmate 1-0. My opponent played 3. …h6 aka the anti fried liver attack which I think is almost always a mistake. This allows me to attack the center immediately with 4.d4 and leads to a position I love to have as white. He also developed his queen way to early which allowed me to threaten a nasty discovered attack on f6 with my light squared bishop and rook. While he dealt with these threats I cleared his dark squared bishop off the board to prepare the pawn storm which lead to an easy to spot mate in 3.
You need to check your game with better offerings then the weak analysis you get from Chess.com. You made many mistakes in the game.
Here is the analysis from Chessbase 17 with a Threadripper CPU and the latest update of Stockfish Stockfish DEV 20221209.
Just seeing this now. I think you are way off. I am not a computer. No one is. If i analyze my games with a supercomputer it will be less informative than if I analyze them at low depth; ie I am not ever going to be playing at 3500+ level. Humans simply do not understand these moves and thus they are irrelevant. Unless you are super GM chess.com analysis is sufficient, better yet human analysis.
Edit: how silly is that analysis that white loses on every metric but wins decisively, also in a short time control. I'm sorry but that is totally irrelevant.
I see. So the title
No mistakes Italian gameWas just click bait. Got it.
If you analyze a game with the regular chess.com engine and then with a supercomputer at high depth, ya you are always going to find mistakes. However, no human can calculate 30 moves ahead, especially in blitz, and perfectly reasonable human moves might be considered a mistake because the computer is setting up some mate in 15 by force. Yet with a regular engine and human play, the moves made in this game were correct save for some innaccuracies. No mistakes for white using the *chess.com engine. I think you have a misunderstanding of how to use engines if you really think this way tbh.