15... d5 seems to be a mistake, gaining two pawns for a pawn and a knight, as was 16. Nxd5.
28... Re1+ looks stronger than the game continuation.
Horrific Blunder at the end, but otherwise....
Sort:
My advice is to develop all of your peices before you start trading things off.
Like 4. . . Be7
it seems like you only played taht move because you were scared to push your pawn to cg (Which I believe would've been way better. Your knight can go somewhere else.)
Furthermore, I believe that fiachetto-ing your light bishop wasn't too good of a plan, with white's pawns all placed on light squares and all.
When he played Rook to f1 you had a free queen
Also, even with your blunder at the end, your position isn't completley lost. You could've pulled it off, I think.
Okay, 16 Nxd5 was questionable a bad trade but you broke up the pawn structure and the opponent gave the piece back when he castled. By the time you got to 26 you were up a rook and two pawns it was time to simplify... R-e1+, RxR, QxR+, K-c2, Q-e2+ followed by Qxp offering a Queen trade would have been a death sentence. Move #28 you should have played QxQ for free, game set match.
After your blunder, also, I would've started pushing some pawns, closing in on hi sking. Both his Rook and Queen are defending peices here, so getting some counter attack would over work them both.
After the blunder, I got this continuation
Yeah, 28. was catastrophic! I think you missed the boat on move 20. 20. ...Qd6+ is a winner. If he plays 21. Kg8 then 21. ...Qe6+ and pick up a pawn and his king is hung out to dry. If he goes 21. Ke8 then you reply 21. ...Qc6+ and win the rook!
chessking775 wrote:
When he played Rook to f1 you had a free queen
I think that's the blunder (or possibly allowing mate) that the OP was referring to.
#3 bg5 exchanging the b.s has no point ,and allows ..#6.....nd4(forcing n/p for b.) better bd3 ......The real problem is attacking before your opening pieces are set up. Slow down and "think why am i doing this move" and "what will my opponent do" ?
ALso, I forgot to add, that this was a blitz game.
paulgottlieb wrote:
Unfortunately, a game where you play great, but blunder horribly at the end counts exactly as much as a game where you played like an idiot through the entire game: zero. It's a hard lesson, but in chess you have to keep your concentration until the clocks stop. To quote Yoda from Star Wars, "Do or do not. There is no try."
But enough preaching! You played reasonably well in the game, certainly better than your opponent. Here are a few thoughts:
3...b6 doesn't look that good. White.s e-pawn looks pretty solidly protected, so isn't there a good chance that your bishop will be beating it's head against the was. In any case, it's generally a good idea to develop your kingside quickly and castle. So I think 3.Nf6, followed by Bc5 and O-O is a better approach
6...Nd4 looks wrong. Chess is a team game--your knight isn't going to win all by itself. Play 6...Nf6 and castle and you will add a knight and rook to your attacking force. You also overlooked 9...c6! (if 10.Nb4, a5!).
18.O-O-O was a pure blunder, although you were probably winning anyway. Add in 19.f4? and you are now a full rook up.
24...Re2! is totally crushing. Whenever you can safely double your heavy pieces on the opponent's 2nd rank--do it!
25...g5?! is a very odd move. When you have a winning material advantage--and a good position as well--think safety. Whatever idea you had when you played g5, I know it wasn't safety! And 26...gxf4 looks very dangerous, opening the g-file on you king. But despite two unnecessarily risky moves, you're still winning! 27...Qe1+ forces mate! Were you incredibly short of time when White offered you his queen with 28.Rf1 and you insisted on giving him yours instead?
Sad ending to a decently played game, but the message is clear: The time to relax your concentration is after he turns his king over
Thanks very much for this analysis, and the rest of you as well. Yes, I was relatively low on time at the end when I blundered, but not low enough to justify such a mistake. That was just me dropping my concentration. I'm sad to say it, but I agree that my resignation may have been premature, I was simply angry at myself for the blunder and did not take time to look at my options.
According to your diagram (OP) he had mate in one when you resigned.
He did. I would have resigned a few moves earlier. Kept playing on for some reason. Like I said, I wasn't pleased with myself (or thinking straight) after that blunder. On tilt so to speak.
I think I played a pretty solid game right up to the end (where I resigned) in which I simply made an idiotic mistake. Mind taking a look and telling me what you think?