Twinchicky wrote:
Bigmac: Why are you telling me? :/
well it makes nf5 the answer to the tile and i have got board of this one now
Game, please help me find my weakest move
Sort:
Twinchicky wrote:
elig5428 wrote:
achja wrote:d
I quote you saying "dubious" on Qf6, that's ridiculous, for reasons beyond your knowledge. {SNIP}
If you have so much more knowledge than achja, why is your rating more than 800 points below his?
I'll post my own analysis shortly, and I will expect it to be treated as an OPINION of a HIGHER-RATED PLAYER. I didn't reach 1400 by being a jerk to anyone criticizing me, especially when I was the one asking to be criticized. I took the advice of people more knowledgeable than me, and I suggest you do too.
Wow, twinchicky, where can I begin to help you and ask for some convenient civility at the same time, annoting that your comments were half principled and maybe well intended, but your level of ettiquette in your first statement was ethically deplorable and hideous my friend. Up into your entrant at the fun house I started last week, well about six months ago, I was friendly reviewing every comment with a fair attentive honest look at what was intended to be said, and relation to "principles" of good chess. Now, is that you'd have stated that you'd "expect" your "analysis" to be treated with "respect" as the "OPINION of a HIGHER-RATED PLAYER." And I quote, then you sayt, "I didn't reach 1400 by being a jerk to anyone criticizing me." No. But annote. I have not written anything to playt #atchja undue, or without cause. Thist player #atchja wrote some antiquated statements which I asserted were unfounded based on principles, and added some banter which lacked in proper ettiquette (meaning somewhat overt rude). Are you staying with me this far???
Okay, I also read your "analysis" which I will give all due respect, because you are still a person who deserves respect, and not a grand master, if its still okay that I say that fact openly. So. But, for other reasons, that I will contain, I will sayt that I can evenly say that I must remit this same exact opening to any grandmaster, almost, haha, at least any in the living.
Again, like I saiyt above, you have some half reasonable comments, but your entrant and opening state on my undercomings with regard to this guy atchja makes me think your supposed well intended comments it might not be worth it to play a game with you.
bigmac30 wrote:
fairly precise ending though
"Thanks"
tthechesstitan wrote:
elig5428 wrote:
To start with 5..Qf6 allows 6.e5! as after 6...Qxe5 BWhite has 7.Re1 winning the queen
Okayt.?
yeres30 wrote:
In the position after 13...d5 White's best move would have been 14.exd6 (en passant) - see diagram below
The rationale for the move 14.exd6 is that Black is way behind in development and the exposure of Black's K in the center presents a challenge to one's tactics.
Consider this. After 14...Qxd6 there's 15.Rfe1+
The position above is a challenge. (A) 15....Ne7 16.???? (B) 15....Be6 16.???? (C) 15....Kf8 16.????
After 15....Be6 for example, the move 16.Qb3 threatens 17...Qxb7 as well as 17.Bxe6 fxe6 18.Rxe6+ winning the Q.
Okayt, thinkt. Boot.
I'm gist here to have fun, and talk logics, and present a reasoned opinion not based on facts of knowing princples or good chess, but backing it up with opinion that is supported by thoughtful consideration of different logics in asserting some of many chess principles. Thank.
Jun 10, 2014
0
#28
elig5428 wrote:
Twinchicky wrote:
elig5428 wrote:
achja wrote:d
I quote you saying "dubious" on Qf6, that's ridiculous, for reasons beyond your knowledge. {SNIP}
If you have so much more knowledge than achja, why is your rating more than 800 points below his?
I'll post my own analysis shortly, and I will expect it to be treated as an OPINION of a HIGHER-RATED PLAYER. I didn't reach 1400 by being a jerk to anyone criticizing me, especially when I was the one asking to be criticized. I took the advice of people more knowledgeable than me, and I suggest you do too.
Wow, twinchicky, where can I begin to help you and ask for some convenient civility at the same time, annoting that your comments were half principled and maybe well intended, but your level of ettiquette in your first statement was ethically deplorable and hideous my friend. Up into your entrant at the fun house I started last week, well about six months ago, I was friendly reviewing every comment with a fair attentive honest look at what was intended to be said, and relation to "principles" of good chess. Now, is that you'd have stated that you'd "expect" your "analysis" to be treated with "respect" as the "OPINION of a HIGHER-RATED PLAYER." And I quote, then you sayt, "I didn't reach 1400 by being a jerk to anyone criticizing me." No. But annote. I have not written anything to playt #atchja undue, or without cause. Thist player #atchja wrote some antiquated statements which I asserted were unfounded based on principles, and added some banter which lacked in proper ettiquette (meaning somewhat overt rude). Are you staying with me this far???
Okay, I also read your "analysis" which I will give all due respect, because you are still a person who deserves respect, and not a grand master, if its still okay that I say that fact openly. So. But, for other reasons, that I will contain, I will sayt that I can evenly say that I must remit this same exact opening to any grandmaster, almost, haha, at least any in the living.
Again, like I saiyt above, you have some half reasonable comments, but your entrant and opening state on my undercomings with regard to this guy atchja makes me think your supposed well intended comments it might not be worth it to play a game with you.
If my comments were not well-intentioned, I would not have posted them. I'm here to help. Again, I will give you a bit of advice that when someone more knowledgeable than you gives you advice, pay attention to it and don't argue with them, even if that means just taking it with a grain of salt and moving on.
If achja did make what you think are "antiquated statements", then you have every right to ignore them. However, as a word of advice, don't openly criticize someone's opinion when you are fully aware that (a) they are much more knowledgeable on a topic, and (b) you are the one who initially wanted to recieve advice and criticism. This applies not only to chess, but to anything in life.
I sincerely apologize if my use of capitalization offended you, but I maintain that an analysis should be treated as an opinion - Take the advice that sounds useful to you, and ignore the advice that seems unreasonable. When you do ignore advice (You might ignore some of my advice, I'm not a particularly strong player, although I would pay attention to every word achja and other 1800+ players have to say), do not argue. This is a lesson that I learned a long time ago, as arguing with people when they are trying to do you a favor will get you absolutely nowhere - People will increasingly dislike you and you will recieve fewer of the favors you ask for.
I and many others, such as achja and everyone else who posted in this thread, want to help you become a better chess player. When you have the oppurtunity to recieve advice and instruction from so many people who are so eager to assist you, don't ruin it for yourself because of your own pride.
Jun 10, 2014
0
#29
Oh, and another bit of advice for you elig: Your big vocabulary means nothing if (a) you don't know how to properly use the words and (b) you are incapable of using at least somewhat proper grammar and punctuation. I take it English probably isn't your first language?
elig5428 wrote:
Hey, yall, I'd won the game in black i post next, it was a fun win because of the rating difference, and I spent more time in than usual focusing on my moves in this correspondence game. I posted it for fun viewing, because it was definite fun winning against somewhat 2-300 points better ranked than me. I was gist wondering if someone could point out my weakest move, with greatest error, so I can study it again, was it in the endgame or the opening, as I thought it was in the opening? And you do not have to necessary explain why, just cite it please, okay, or no comment needed, and thanks.... Lige
Obviously, the one thing you havent learned from the game is sportsmanshhip, and manners. You asked for help, and all you have done is belittle those that tried to help you.
I can see why youre rated so low, you cant get over yourself.
Jun 10, 2014
0
#31
I_Am_Second wrote:
Obviously, the one thing you havent learned from the game is sportsmanshhip, and manners. You asked for help, and all you have done is belittle those that tried to help you.
I can see why youre rated so low, you cant get over yourself.
+1
chessmicky wrote:
6...dxc3 is just a poor move. That much is obvious. The whole point of this variation is to keep that blocking pawn in the center, making it tricky for White to develop. 6...dxc3 frees White's game while developing his Nb1.
13.Ne4! was a very strong move for White. After 13...d5 (what else?) 14.Nd6+ White has more space, better development and a safer king.
White seems to have forgotten the en passant rule. After 14.exd6! Black is practically lost. His king is a sitting duck and he is way behing in development.
21.Bxh7 was just suicidal, but Black had two much better moves than Bh3. 21...Rg4+ or 21...Rh8 were much better
"After 14.exd6! Black is practically lost. His king is a sitting duck and he is way behing in development." I feel you are inadequately defending the first part that I am annihilated at move 14. in fact I intent direct that you are wrong in basic. You must have missed some tactical advantages I had at the snapshot of the board @move 14. Sorry. Newt. Okay baby boot. Poot.
Twinchicky wrote:
elig5428 wrote:
Twinchicky wrote:
elig5428 wrote:
achja wrote:d
I quote you saying "dubious" on Qf6, that's ridiculous, for reasons beyond your knowledge. {SNIP}
If you have so much more knowledge than achja, why is your rating more than 800 points below his?
I'll post my own analysis shortly, and I will expect it to be treated as an OPINION of a HIGHER-RATED PLAYER. I didn't reach 1400 by being a jerk to anyone criticizing me, especially when I was the one asking to be criticized. I took the advice of people more knowledgeable than me, and I suggest you do too.
Wow, twinchicky, where can I begin to help you and ask for some convenient civility at the same time, annoting that your comments were half principled and maybe well intended, but your level of ettiquette in your first statement was ethically deplorable and hideous my friend. Up into your entrant at the fun house I started last week, well about six months ago, I was friendly reviewing every comment with a fair attentive honest look at what was intended to be said, and relation to "principles" of good chess. Now, is that you'd have stated that you'd "expect" your "analysis" to be treated with "respect" as the "OPINION of a HIGHER-RATED PLAYER." And I quote, then you sayt, "I didn't reach 1400 by being a jerk to anyone criticizing me." No. But annote. I have not written anything to playt #atchja undue, or without cause. Thist player #atchja wrote some antiquated statements which I asserted were unfounded based on principles, and added some banter which lacked in proper ettiquette (meaning somewhat overt rude). Are you staying with me this far???
Okay, I also read your "analysis" which I will give all due respect, because you are still a person who deserves respect, and not a grand master, if its still okay that I say that fact openly. So. But, for other reasons, that I will contain, I will sayt that I can evenly say that I must remit this same exact opening to any grandmaster, almost, haha, at least any in the living.
Again, like I saiyt above, you have some half reasonable comments, but your entrant and opening state on my undercomings with regard to this guy atchja makes me think your supposed well intended comments it might not be worth it to play a game with you.
If my comments were not well-intentioned, I would not have posted them. I'm here to help. Again, I will give you a bit of advice that when someone more knowledgeable than you gives you advice, pay attention to it and don't argue with them, even if that means just taking it with a grain of salt and moving on.
If achja did make what you think are "antiquated statements", then you have every right to ignore them. However, as a word of advice, don't openly criticize someone's opinion when you are fully aware that (a) they are much more knowledgeable on a topic, and (b) you are the one who initially wanted to recieve advice and criticism. This applies not only to chess, but to anything in life.
I sincerely apologize if my use of capitalization offended you, but I maintain that an analysis should be treated as an opinion - Take the advice that sounds useful to you, and ignore the advice that seems unreasonable. When you do ignore advice (You might ignore some of my advice, I'm not a particularly strong player, although I would pay attention to every word achja and other 1800+ players have to say), do not argue. This is a lesson that I learned a long time ago, as arguing with people when they are trying to do you a favor will get you absolutely nowhere - People will increasingly dislike you and you will recieve fewer of the favors you ask for.
I and many others, such as achja and everyone else who posted in this thread, want to help you become a better chess player. When you have the oppurtunity to recieve advice and instruction from so many people who are so eager to assist you, don't ruin it for yourself because of your own pride.
You said "don't openly criticize someone's opinion ... This applies not only to chess, but to anything in life." I don't have any respect when you make this weird police rule with the idea like I'm supposed to respect the fact that are an internet monitor telling me to watch my chess ettiquette around players who are identified by some point rank that is higher. Are you real gonna say that I'm not reading you right, which I disagree respectful. Dre alert. Charist? I real want to help you on my blog that I started, can we please be friends and write a lot if we disagree? Or would you retort that you are way above me in rank and unable to exchange emails and future comments. But I loves you anyway #Twinchicky, and we are personal involved in an important game right now, like we date or something, . But you may quit if you want to lose that other way. Oh #Twinchicky, this would be a world class game if you would agree to have dinner only with me, because I bet that you are fun to talk to in person, and with no bad intent, as I ask. Ok, dear??? Have fun decoding. Its reat. Truns oat it brick eight.
Oatk. Kit.
Then you said. "Oh, and another bit of advice for you elig: Your big vocabulary means nothing if (a) you don't know how to properly use the words and (b) you are incapable of using at least somewhat propergrammar and punctuation. I take it English probably isn't your first language?" What are you also the grammar and puncuation police and you don't have any respect for foreigners, are you a bigot against foreigners, because if you are then I will quit this game right now and avoid the time it will take me, which is little, of spanking you in my way to a win, in which I will show you that you have little good knowledge of chess principles, ettiquette, or tactics... But IF you agree to be and remain civil, I'd play several games with you and try to help you with everything I can pretend I know (we can talk and have fun about logic in seeking chess principles, rights???), but ind anyway, I'd prove something else also, and still be your friend because I will be defeating you within 26 moves. Pleat tay. Okay??? Pleat. Plead. Sit. Sess. Eights.
[COMMENT DELETED]
chessmicky wrote:
It's pretty clear that English is not the OP's original language, just as it's obvious that chess isn't his game. His posts are becoming more and more incoherent, while is chess judgement is getting worse and worse
I can't understand your statement. I think you'd be better off not challenging me because I might win, absolute. Bust, pleat don't criticize me for being so-called ignorant as you intend, bust I feel and thicke you are penitent and fullt pigit (this is a bray ins). bust challenge me if you feel like a good guy, yu know in heart. Alt. Uckt (#inkate). Kate. Bust. Ah more on your lacks. Feel free to defend your, "honor" you'd retort, Note, I int full intent to degrade your honor. Inf trait ecks. Sass. Bit it. Bait.
Alt. Thanks, for reading all the considerate blogs, and wow, I'd appreciate if you'd comment on my specific lacks in judgment, sir, if you had the ability to do so. I think you may have an egoat (ego in biss..ahhh) problem, and I am surmising that because you think You are "RANKED" or something, like some fat pigit, ... Uh huu>? with your big 1900 score, that you think you had clout. I think you are innacurate, again, sir, and I would beg you to prove me dead wrong, because you did not respond to any of my responsive analytical comments above to this poster #Achja. A foolt. Leaving the game in tempo. Wheat. Ifted senate reviewt, but mate, he's gone. And, YOU. itf (mate) you are going to stay on this site in good repute, then instead of the statement which I have quoted you on, you might actual say something and prove it worth a darn, rather than using innuendo. You gist seem to have no understanding of dialectics in rational dialogue where arguments must be proven on assertions by facts and supported conclusions and judgments and the like. Itchue in the principle of good chess called ettiquette ethica, I have assert. So, and WHAT A MICKY you MUXST BE #chesstmicks, I guess you have no sense to take a challd from me, so I must conclude that this might be one of the reasons, I would assert you'd be also accutely aware of your impending difficulty of establishing a win or a title at any FM match, until you have remedied your innert inconsistencies and moral and judgment problems, whit they will never let you resolve. Gate. Bit. So, I have aalso said, and I will sayt it agin that you could play me and we could meet as mates, or you'd act like a baby who got a rating but has no good sense or style, ahhs and BE your own BEST MAN dear Chessmicky. Thank. God. This is posted. You have been noose. Bait. Hack.
Lige
Lige
Playt Achja's motion for reconsider whent he gained crewt in hote, naas, has been summoed annulled. Eight.
Achja's rivals are beat in reviewt as o nowt. Foot. Inting problems suggested con with ex to sote ort sows. penned a rake. Rate. State Achja is ofed. Lec.
Jun 19, 2014
0
#38
This appears to either be a troll or a jargon aphasiac - Most likely the former. Untracking.
Twinchicky wrote:
This appears to either be a troll or a jargon aphasiac - Most likely the former. Untracking.
I think this block is better off if you'd makre a comment that had some logical sense, with input about my specific comments on your first and second posts...mkayy?? However, becud you decided to simply label me what a .. "troll or jargon aphasiac" then I think you are somewhat of a tag letter, meaning you just use names to label people so that in your feeble and somewhat femininely indelicate mind you feel better and think you had gotten in the last punch. However, in case you want to have dinner, then gist let me know, and I'd buy. Or ahh keyt me int on your yook smells on facebook. Okay poopie? Love,
Lige Wachter
Bigmac: Why are you telling me? :/