I know I won this game (playing White), but since this is my first game of chess in quite some time, I would appreciate some analysis on my actual play (both strong and weak moves), as well as any comments on my annotation and overall pattern of thinking on how the game will develop.
I maintained manual notes on my moves and copied them faithfully here to enable me to learn the most from your feedback.
I am not really here to win games (though it would be nice!), or improve my "ranking", but rather am here primarily to learn, so useful comments really would be very welcome indeed.
Thanks for your time!
Thanks for responding - much appreciated.
1. I will take on board that d3 is a passive move and that d4 should be attempted in one move. I guess what you are saying is that i should have protected the central pawns with knights instead of another pawn, as this hindered my development.
2. Not realy sure how i could have saved the kingside?
3. I can see the saving of the knight now - thanks for pointing that out. Is hall study the moves more thoroughly next time! Funny how my variation worked out anyway - we must both have missed that move.
4. Looking back - I dont know why I didnt take the free pawn. I guess I thought I wanted to threaten those three cells on the 6 rank, as i annotated...
5. Obvioulsy pleased about the mate, as I was wondering how long I should really eave my rook there for! Thanks.
In this era of chess, aggressive play seems to win out over passivity. However, I personally don't think that passivity = poor play. Passivity may lend itself to solid positioning and make aggressive play more difficult, but only if carefully played. In your game, I don't have too much of a problem with 2.d3, mainly because your plans haven't materialized yet. It's a matter of personality and preference. I would prefer active play, but I have lost to people who made "passive" moves in the opening, only to find that they were able to realize their plans before I could recognize them. Most solid players, upon seeing 2.d3, would not respond the way Black did in this game, because black's intent seem to be dead right from the start.
Move 9.Bh6 caught my interest. Your anticipation of 10...Qh4+ was interesting to note. I think this position should be evaluated after 10...Qh4+. I thought black had a better line to play; but since he didn't play it, what he did play raised my eyebrows. What I saw after ...Nxg3, Qf2 was Bxh6 and that would leave white a pawn down. But as play goes on, black found himself a piece down, major advantage for white.
If I were you, I would be concerned about the practicality of your aggressiveness because it seems a bit nonchalant without care for what your opponent can do in response. I mean, 9.Bh6 is assertive, but it appears to be without care or consideration for Black's response. I would have traded knights first, then bishops on that move, therby equalizing material, but I would have the next move after the exchange, and my queen would be ready for action on the c1-h6 diagonal, a key diagonal in this game.
I hope I am not being too critical in this game. It is interesting how well you played after so many years off. Nice finish to this one.
It's quite difficult to learn much without improving your "ranking". It seems as if your Online Chess rating has actually skyrocketed into the 2200s. What is the secret to your success?
Perhaps his outlook changed in the previous SIX YEARS.
true, it has, to a degree.