my intention is that awkward Ng5 move on move 5.You don't usually move a piece twice in the opening.
Help analysising this game
Sort:
My thoughts. Be sure to take a look at variations in blue, too. I like to annotate everything.
Was this a blitz game....rg8 a mistake for bg7 and o-o next ?
#11.bxn pxb-----if bxb,Qxn. You have opened both sides of the board.
Dec 8, 2012
0
#7
Rg8 was played to stop the knight fork, and now the knight on g5 for white has no job. It was an OTB game played with long time controls.
eddysallin I was black in the game. I am assuming you mean those moves for my opponent to do.
Dec 8, 2012
0
#8
Also thanks NachtWulf for your comments. Move 8... Ng4 was played to advance the knight to a strong defended position.
Move 9 the thinking behind that was there would be an open b file to attack, and doubled pawns on a weak c file.
Dec 8, 2012
0
#10
blowerd wrote:
Rg8 was played to stop the knight fork, and now the knight on g5 for white has no job. It was an OTB game played with long time controls.
eddysallin I was black in the game. I am assuming you mean those moves for my opponent to do.
Ok, but Nxf7 is not really a threat at this point, as f7 is protected by your king. So I think a simple developing move such as 5...Bg7 is fine. If white goes 6.Nxf7, you play Kxf7 and say thank you 
I think I found a little tactical improvement in move 16. You put your rook on the open file to attack h4, good idea. But why not take the lazy one hanging around on d8? That allows the pawn attack g5 to try to open files on the king side with both rooks. I went only through some variations against the defence g3, looks promising:
kco wrote:
yeres30 wrote:
4.h4 and 5.Ng5 already indicates a weak opponent.
Not really.
Can you please amplify your statement for us? It is one thing to say "not really," but could you please support your assertion with some reason why you said it?
Cheers,
Becky
One can only take from the silence of KCO that he has no idea what he meant by his statement. I'm sure, even if we give him 45 days rather than 45 minutes to explain his statement above in any coherent terms, he still would fail to give an intelligent rationale.
Cheers,
Becky
What's with this perfunctory "cheers" crap? Not giving us (or him) a lot to be cheery about, are ya?
It's like:
"Bite my big toe.
Have a nice day."
(Damn HANDies.)
I see KCO is still around commenting like he's the authority on everything, but not knowing a damn thing about chess.
So, are you going to explain what you meant by your comment about h4, followed by Ng5?
I tell you what, I'll even give you time to look up the answer in a book. Maybe you'll learn something about chess even, (for once) and then you get to come back here and show everyone just how smart you think you are.
We all know how much you like doing that!
Cheers,
Becky
I am black in this game. What did I do well? What could I do better? What did my opponent do well? What could my opponent do better? Thanks in advance for any comments.