That looks very similar to the Fried Liver Attack in terms of how you sacrificed your knight to bring his king out
He made some really questionable moves in your game but yeah, really well done
Early sacrifice in exchange for pawns… and the “initiative”
Sort:
tonswinchillchur, what I particularly like about this game is the fact that you weren't intimidated by a high rating. Too many players (myself included, too often, I'm afraid) see players with higher numbers than their own, and start to think of their opponent as some sort of demi-god (obviously untrue. Everyone makes mistakes, and anyone can blunder at anytime). It's nice to see someone take a chance, attack a "better" player and pull off a fantastic win.
Good for you.
Nicely done! I think move 8 was the key both ways. 8.bxe6? was unsound unless your name is Tal. But black threw away the potential advantage with 8...h6?? Your analysis is right on there. He should have simply taken the bishop or knight.
paavoboy wrote:
Nicely done! I think move 8 was the key both ways. 8.bxe6? was unsound unless your name is Tal.
Thanks paavo! To paraphrase Lloyd Bentsen in his 1988 VP debate with Dan Quayle, I'm afraid "I am no Tal", paavo!
o_O,
cool
hey re your message to me: what do you need my advice for? You are getting master advice here! :)
normajeanyates wrote:
hey re your message to me: what do you need my advice for? You are getting master advice here! :)
don't be modest, norma. yr advice is most welcome, anytime!!
As pointed out by NM tonydal, the line I give after a hypothetical 42... Re1+ contains an error, given that 44... h5+ would hang my Bishop [see Move List]. The correct continuation for Black was 44... Nd3, 45 Rc2 followed by either Nxe5+ 46 dxe5 Rxe5, or by 45... Rb1. Either way, 42... Re1+ (instead of the wrong 42... Ng6??) would've won the game for Black.
And as linksspringer observes, 8...Qxg5! was the correct way to respond to 8. Bxe6. My sacrifice would have failed, and Black would have gone on to win the game.
So I did get luck after all!!
If you're asking whether your initial sacrifice was sound or not, then it was not. Did you notice that Black could've played the very straightforward 8...Qxg5!
Jul 25, 2008
0
#11
tonswinchillchur
You had an interesting game with your opponent. :) I agree with anaxagoras and linksspringer that 8...Qxg5 9 Bxd7+ Kxd7 10 Qf3 Rb8 would have given black an advantage and you would only get one pawn for your bishop.
After his 8...h6 also possible was 9 Bxd7+ Qxd7 10 Nf3 which you would end up exchanging your bishop for one of his pawns and a knight.
After 10...Kxf7 you played 12 Qf3+ to go after the b7 pawn. :) I would prefer 12 Qb3+ since it would do the same thing but with 12 Qb3+ black can't develop a piece while blocking check. :)
You had 14 Qc4 and you thought 14 Qc2 was passive. In my opinion I think 14 Qc2 was playable because black has a hole at g6 which can become usefull for your queen. Then you might consider 0-0 to take the king out of danger and at the same time put your king rook on the same file as the king.
35...Rc1 might have been interesting for black since it pins down white's bishop threatening to play 36...Ne3+ 37 Ke2 (if you want to save your bishop) Nd1 (forking the b2 pawn and your rook) 38 Kd2 Nxd2 39 Kxc1 Nd3+ forking your b2 pawn, your king, and your bishop. And you would lose your b2 pawn and maybe even the a3 pawn. If white tries playing either 36 Ke2 or 36 Re2 to try to work off the pin then 36...Nf4 looks aggressive for black with 37...Rd1 coming to get behind the passed pawn.
39...Bg5 would have been interesting for black as it attacks the rook with some good potential. :)
You mentioned that black missed 42...Re1+ 43 Kf6 g5+ 44 Kg4 h5+ but instead of 45 Kg3 you would have 45 Kxg5 and you have enough to win the game from there. :)
If he plays 52...Bc7 then you have 53 Ra7 pinning his bishop. :)
Great game! :)
Aug 2, 2008
0
#12
Well it seems you wrote to quite a few people for comments lol, sorry to be slow getting here, was on vacation for a week. Well I think you have had your answer, the sac was unsound as Qxg5 refutes it. Because of this I would say that Ng5 wasn't the best idea in that position, you were right in thinking you had an advantage but perhaps simple development with 7 Nc3 or Qb6 might have been better, but than we wouldn't have had the fun 
I agree with Einstein that 11Qb3 was a bit better than Qf3 for the reason he gave. And then on move 12 after 12 Qxb7 I think black should have tried Qb8, it's a bit prosaic I know but if the queens come off your initiative is gone and if instead 13Qc6 then Qb6 seems to grab the initiative either forcing the Q exch or forcing you onto the back foot with moves like Bb4+ threatened.
Haven't looked critically at the rest as you have plenty of comments, but it was very entertaining and a credit to both players!
After playing just a single game as a chess.com newcomer, a challenge from a player who, having won 96% of his 700+ games, had a rating of nearly 1900 against my meager 1166 caught me by surprise. "Why not, I said to myself, this is all about learning, right?" And the fact that I could earn nearly 500 pts in the unlikely case I won (vis-à-vis a 15 pt loss if defeated) gave me an extra incentive to play!!
As it turns out, it was an exciting, and exhausting, game. I took a gamble early on, sacrificing one of my knights in exchange for leaving his King exposed and what I thought would be 2, but ended up being, 3 pawns!! From that moment on I had the initiative, which I used to play quite aggressively to keep my opponent on his toes. Then I screwed up by opening up the game a bit too soon, but was able to hold on to my pieces until, once again, we reached a pretty nice endgame, where the threat of promoting either one of my extra pawns finally led me to a win.
Once over, my opponent graciously referred to it as an "awesome game". Hope you guys agree, and would be grateful for any feedback on the overall strategy and/or specific moves. Cheers, tonswin.