Learning from a loss

I am not very comfortable with the black pieces, and I think you can see it in this game.� I would say that over the total time I've spent playing chess since I was around 15 (I'm 28 now) I've probably played the black pieces 5% of the time.� I'm of course working on that now, however I'm posting this game for a little help.

While I was playing this game, I felt around move 17 that I had made a mistake somewhere b/c white's knight seemed to have some really nice squares.� I tried to stop that, and my game just fell apart.� On the bright side, I'm posting this game here for maybe a little analysis from you higher rated players.� Any comments you might have will definitely be read for full appreciation.

Hi, Thanks for showing the game. Around move 10, although you have the bishop (to his knight) you are a pawn down. So I guess you came out of the opening a little down.

I would not have traded queens when you did. Your're a pawn down so as the material gets taken off the board there's a danger that you slip into a lost endgame. After 13. cd: you have a central pawn but it is weak and isolated.  At this point it's going to hard to save the game. Even if you manage to swap the d pawn for his e pawn you are left facing a 3:2 pawn majority on the queenside. I think that it is possible that the reason you overlooked subsequent attacks on your d pawn is because you saw it as a strength (a central pawn) rather than a weakness. Instead of 12. ... Qd6 I think I would play 12. ... Bd7 or, more likely, 12. ... O-O.

That makes a lot of sense.  I think you are right about me mistaking my central pawn as a strength.  I need to become more efficient and aware when it comes to pawn moves.  Thank you for your analysis, as every little piece of insight helps.

However, in the opening central pawns are valuable as I am sure you know. It is just by the time you play cd: we're pretty much out of the opening and there isn't much to control. Pawn structure then starts to become very important and weak and isolated pawns are a real liability.

It's funny because I prefer playing black to white :) - however, when I look at my stats, I win more often with the white pieces than with the black pieces.

Well, regardless of what lead to this position, I dont see it as totally lost. Like I know I wouldnt have resigned this soon.

Not saying you'll win, but hey, you might find a way to draw from here.

Again, you make a strong point.  I always notice isolated and otherwise weak pawns in tactical puzzles, however it's a totally different thing to be able to see them in your own games.

i've started studying some myself recently, trying to move from being a completely casual player to somewhat more knowledgeable.  In the scotch games i've studied, the usual play is 4 ... Nf6 instead of 4 ... Bc5.  You might try looking down those lines instead if you want a change of pace.

Hello,

7...d5 looked a bit suicidal, going into a self-pin, and leaving Bc5 undefended. 7...Ne5 preparing c6, and d5 looks the most ambitious. Whilst 7...0.0 would be a solid move.

Unfortuantely think the ending was losing from beginning because pawn down, and d6 very weak. White has natural plan, of f3 then moving knight round to e3, controling d5. Looks grim for black.

17 ... d5 might be your best hope. 18 ed Bxd5 19 b3 and his c pawn is backwards, at least temporarilly, and you have the B vs N in a more open game. His 18 e5 would make your game very cramped though and put all your pieces on the defensive.

TwoMove:  Yes, I agree with your thoughts on 7...d5.  I moved for a pawn break too hastily.  This is not a difficult continuation to see for me; I guess I got lazy.

xMenace: I like 17...d5.  I think what happened here is i panicked.  I got so caught up in worrying about his knight, that I knowingly made a move that didn't really do anything to stop it... in fact I may have subconciously conceeded the game right then and there.

I didn't think you played badly overall. I agree 7...d5 does not look best.  You came out of the opening with bad pawn structure and a pawn down... losing, but not lost.

But, you misunderstood the ending and lost quickly because of it.

17.f3... and you moved: ...a5? "preparing to stop Nb3" -- It doesn't stop Nb3 and it's beside the point, anyway.

Assess the board -- One pawn down in the ending with healthy pawn structure and you've got hope. But go two pawns down in the ending and you need a miracle.

So, there's an emergency on the board: you've got an isolated pawn on d6, it's on a dark square and you've got a light square bishop, the d5 square is covered by a white pawn and a white rook... looks bad for the d6 pawn!

The major focus of white's plan is utterly obvious... use threats against the d6 pawn to win it outright or provoke further weaknesses in your position that lead to the loss of a pawn somewhere, at which point -- white's advantage becomes crushing.

Your plan should be very obvious to you, trade the sickly d6 pawn for his healthy e pawn or c pawn -- just do that before your position crumbles and you've got something like a defensible drawable game. 

He doesn't have any easy immediate win of the d6 pawn that I can see... you don't have any immediate way of forcing the exchange, the fight is on, advantage white IMO.

Instead you played 17...a5, does nothing good for your position that I can see, in fact I think it is probably losing (a6 would be much better, but really is beside the point in my opinion. Re8-e6, preparing for Ra8-e1 would be my thinking.

18.b4?? is just pure blunder and after the capture your position is hopeless. 

You did not resign early. The connected passers on the flank? He needs to have a very fast growing brain tumor to find a way to lose from there.

17...d5 looks appealing, and maybe it is right... but white doesn't take IMO, white pushes 18.e5. [edit] -- this was my idea in ...17.Re6 and then ...Rae8. Get the rooks doubled on the e pawn to keep it from moving -- then you push your d-pawn.

JG27Pyth: I have to aggree that a5 was just disgusting... and then b4 completely embarrassing.  One positive here is that I have learned how much work I have to do in the area of pawn play... especially in the middle game. Thanks for your comments.

Yes, after 17... d5 18. e5 then white follows up with nb3-d4, and black has a bad bishop to go with his troubles. Whilst after 17...Re6 18.Nf1 Rae8 19.Ne3 don't think black can ever push d5 without dropping pawn.

TwoMove -- Whilst after 17...Re6 18.Nf1 Rae8 19.Ne3 don't think black can ever push d5 without dropping pawn.

It's interesting from there: My first thought is 19...f5 -- I think it's ok for black there. Haven't checked anything with the computer, maybe that's losing or black has better but on first blush it looks ok to me.

JG27Pyth: I have to aggree that a5 was just disgusting... and then b4 completely embarrassing.  One positive here is that I have learned how much work I have to do in the area of pawn play... especially in the middle game. Thanks for your comments.

Don't be too hard on yourself. We're all students.  Everytime I post a message with analysis I wait for some better player to tell me everything I've said is tragi-comically wrong and I should stick to tiddly-winks (unrated tiddly-winks).

By any wild chance after 11Qxd5 did you consider:

11... o-o, 12.  Qxa8 Bh3, 13. Qd5 Bxg2, 14. Rg1 Bxe4, 15. Qg5 f6, 16.  Qe3 Re8?  I don't know what may result from this, but when I see a queen attacking a hanging rook, I tend to want to bait the queen to the corner and play some tactics from that point, especially when the opposing king is still in the middle of the board.

Very interesting continuation.

JG27Pyth: I don't understand 19...f5 because white just plays 20nxp. By the time f5 is prepared white is attacking d6 I think.

thepitbull's line is more like the kind of thing to try when in a difficult situation, basically trying to keep the game as complicated as possible, so that the opponent could make a mistake. The line isn't forced i.e white could ignore rook with 12.0.0, or exchange queen for two rooks with 13QxR etc. The fact unsure of best response though means it is already a better chance than unpromising endgame, where white can tidy up all details under very little pressure at all.

TwoMove: That's a very interesting strategical idea to which I've not been exposed. "If you are in a losing position (but not a lost one) keep things as complicated as possible hoping for a mistake by your opponent.

It's not very deep really it is all about putting up the maximum possible resistance. In some games, you might have some hope in toughing it out in the endgame a pawn down, by aiming for a rook endgame, or opposite coloured bishop endgame or something. Other's like this one I think, opponent has a big positional plus to go with pawn, so you have to play for complications.