Blitz = Heart Attack Before Adulthood!
Sort:
This heart stopping blitz game had me shaking by the end and I'm just glad I won! (Not to mention the 239 rating gain!) Plz comment/analyze.
h6 is actually ?
WHY Qd2
I would have taken g6 first
Why would that be? There is no refutaion, therefore, no '?'
Re2 would be best
Ok, if your going to post madly, please be more clear. Idk at what moves you are talking about... your just ranting!
Bad use of "!": what is so fantastic about 5. Re1?
Haayden wrote:
Bad use of "!": what is so fantastic about 5. Re1?
Ok, ya, bad use, but is better than, say Nc3?!, which is met by Nxe4, but to see why Nxe4? is bad after Re1, see move list.
You must be proud of that line because that is not relevant. Re1 is just Re1, save the exclamation marks for something unreal or remarkable, not for moves like Qd2!... again, why so special?
I am only badgering because I feel that there truly is nothing special about the moves you made and that you are just stuffing your ego-trousers full with phallic-like meats and vegetables!
If there is significance to Qd2! besides avoiding the discovered attack, d7! which I feel is a blunder, or Re7! please explain, I could be wrong.
Jul 8, 2009
0
#11
"Ok, ya, bad use, but is better than, say Nc3?!"
Why is 5. Nc3 so questionable??
I seems to me that if 5...Nxe4, then 6. Bxf7+ followed by NxN equalizes and Black's king is exposed. Certainly not losing for black, but not bad for white.
batgirl wrote:
"Ok, ya, bad use, but is better than, say Nc3?!"
Why is 5. Nc3 so questionable??
I seems to me that if 5...Nxe4, then 6. Bxf7+ followed by NxN equalizes and Black's king is exposed. Certainly not losing for black, but not bad for white.
This is why I gave '?!' and not '?'. It is simply unfavorable. Black can castle artificially and will have the f-file to work with. Theoretically, Black has equalized. And before I get flamed again, can someone give me ANALYSIS, not rude comments on my annotating?
Jul 8, 2009
0
#13
"Plz comment/analyze"
I'm not sure what you consider flaming. If you yourself bring up a point I don't agree with, I consider it debatable and debate isn't flaming in my book. (plus, you yourself asked for comments as well as analysis)
Either this was a Blitz game or it wasn't. If it was indeed a blitz game, it's not even worthy of analysis. This isn't a personal commentary, but a practical one since blitz games, by their very nature, are superficial and not worth the trouble of analysis. Blitz games, however, are worthy of exhibition because they often contain some beautiful moves such as your game does and, as a result, are often entertaining and even educational, usually centering around some tactical blow.
If indeed this was a blitz game, then I would have to severely disagree with your reply to the 5. Nc3 line on the simple (winning) blitz principle that it's easier to attack than defend. Even unsound attacks must be proven to be unsound and very, very often the attempt to refute an attack requires far too much time - clock time is a prime consideration in blitz - and if time itself doesn't get you, mistakes from trying to hurry possibly might. Such is blitz.
