I gave away the lead :(


So here's a game OTB I thought I was doing really well in until the end game.  Time control was 30 minutes each with no increments.  Moves are annotated with my thoughts.



So I'll be the first one to say I was probably over agressive when I should have been completing my development.  Any ideas?


Oh hey!  Haven't heard from you in a long time :D  I'm playing in a local tournament this weekend, I'll be sure to post those games as well.  Hopefully I'll see you around soon!


3... e5 was bad positionally, it creates a hole at d5.

11... Ndb4 would be interesing here, making white wonder why he played the queen to e1.

12... Bh3 was definitely bad.  It would have been better to take on c3 before playing this.

17... Nxc2 was a mistake.  g6 would have been better.

21... Kc7 was also a mistake.

The rest of the game should probably not be analysed since you were in such time trouble.


Thanks for the reply BorgQueen :D  

I always see the silliness of my moves after the game, never during, it's too bad hind-sight is 20/20 huh?  I see the point of 17. ...g6; the idea is to play Bh6 skewering the knight and rook while developing the bishop and *finally* connecting my rooks.  Despite missing this, the engine show that black still has a slight advantage after 21. Nc4 (~-0.34).  I REALLY wish I could explain why I thought 21. ...Kc7 was a good move.  I think my best description would be that I just didn't know what to play next and what my plan was, so I played a move.


I see nothing wrong with 3...e5  Especially after white's unenterprising 4.Ne2  I mean c'mmon BQ this is a pretty standard pawn formation for Sicilians.

After 7.g3  This is perfect for black, it's like a bind reversed but white's wasted moves with his queenside.  (That is to say, your move d5 was good).

7.c4 is a terrible line, if you were wasting your time looking at the move then you didn't understand the position.  It kicks your knight?  So what, it ruins his pawns/center.

9. 0-0-0  I love it, you have a clear idea (attack) and his attack is more difficult.

10...Bg4 his knight is unimportant and you're not done developing, so I'm saying wasted move :)

12...Bh3    I agree with BQ, this is terrible.  But I also disagree, this move wont be good for a long time (until you get the attack rolling, and even then it may not be called for).  Here its both a positional blunder (but it also turns out to be a tactical blunder).  Positional blunder because it's your "good" bishop and you're undeveloped and you've moved it 3 times now.

14.Qxf1   Forget knight takes.  14.Bxc6 is the obvious choice for white... I can't think of any reason he missed this move...

15.Qg2 and now he gives up the bishop too?  Are you sure he wasn't rated 1300? Tongue out

16...Nb4 holy crap you're back in the game somehow :)

17...Nxc2 holy crap you took yourself out and still haven't finished development :p

22...b6 makes no sense to me, it's as odd as move 21 but you don't comment on it.



The opening was a big success for black, and you even had a good idea to use for the middlegame (attack his king).  But you failed to develop and failed to attack (push those kingside pawns!)

And a relevant axiom to add to this summary, (paraphrase) "beginners like to play with their best pieces, masters look for their worst"

You moved your lightsquared bishop everywhere wasting time, and neglected your kingside development.


Most welcome :-)


Yes, waffle, you're probably right about the e5 move... pretty normal for Sicilians, but still, my positional training makes my mind sream out "hole at d5, hole at d5!!"


BTW I make terrible in-game blunders, and hindsight is indeed 20/20 Smile


Haha I audibly laughed out loud at your 16. and 17. comments xD  Excellent critique, thanks :D