Losing Winning Positions.

Hello.

I am a 1230 elo tournament player I've been struggling lately in my OTB games to convert winning positions to wins. Although usually I get out of the opening with a slight advantage, go through the early middlegame getting a winning postion and then I lose the advantage and either draw or lose. It's my third game in a row that I get a winning postion, playing prety well through the opening and the early middlegame and then I blow it away!  Here is a recent example (I play white):

After move 22 white has a clear advantage. I could go either Qxd3 or Bxh6, which I believe is better. 

In move 26 I have a winning position. In this moment I absolutely forgot that after the move 25... Nc7 black has opened the a2-f8 diagonal so his queen can defend on f7. So I blundered playing 26. Qxf7 instead of Qg2 or Qg3. 

I believe that even after the blunder it is a draw and I even have winning chances but made some mistakes (33,34 and mainly 37 where I should 've played Kg3).

What are your suggestions? I believe my tactical play is ok, but very often when I have a clear advantage I overlook something. My endgame play isn't that good, especially when I am frustrated after losing the advantage. My main mistakes happen when there is still some material on the board, say one rook and a minor piece.

The funny thing is that when I find myself with disadvantage I play much more accurately

Any specific suggestions on what areas should I improve?

My knowledge is more focused on openings than middlegames, so the best I can tell you is that there are many problems with your openings. Your blunder in the above game was just overlooking a backward capture, which is a common beginner's mistake that I still make in fast games against computers, so let's say that's forgivable. I do know that if your openings were better, though, you'd get even better middlegame positions, which would help.

Some general opening advice:

(1) Choose openings that are suitable for beginners. For example, I noticed you're playing the Najdorf Sicilian as Black, which is mostly suitable only for experts proficient in deep tactics who want to hang by their fingernails on the edge of survivability, just hoping White will make a tactical mistake that Black can exploit. That's not good for learning general principles or for surviving as a beginner. Similarly, as White you're playing the Zukertort Opening, which is an opening suitable mostly for experts who are hoping to make their opponent go wrong positionally among the resulting bewildering number of possible responses. Then when your opponent did go wrong--on the first move, no less!--you failed to capitalize on it (1...Nc6 2. d4!). In general it's recommended that beginners start with openings that are: (1) forcing (1. e4 or 1. d4), which are more memorizeable, (2) symmetrical (1. e4 e5 or 1. d4 d5), which tend to be less tactical or complicated, (3) classical instead of hypermodern, which means no 1. Nf3 or 1. c4, and (4) openings instead of systems, which means no Reti, King's Indian Attack (1. Nf3 Nf6 2. g3 g6), or Colle System.

(2) Learn the nuances of opening generalities. Sorry, but I don't know of any good books on this. For example: N-QB3 is a somewhat misplaced knight in a symmetrical d4 opening (1. d4 d5 2. Nf3 Nc6?!), beware of queen slaps (dxe4?! ...Qxd1+ Kxd1), both sides want to get a center duo as soon as possible (1...d5 with 1...e5), don't pin a knight that isn't really pinned (6...Bg4?!), beware of playing P-R3 if not called for (8...h6?!), etc.

(3) Know the plans and typical placements of units (for example, 9. Qe1 simply looks wrong, as does 12. Rb1, which means you should have forseen Black's knight advance earlier with maybe c3--see the game at https://www.365chess.com/view_game.php?g=2487005&m=15https://www.365chess.com/view_game.php?g=2487005&m=15 --for whichever openings you learn.

Sqod thanks a lot for your advice and the time you took to check my game.

Very usefull comments on my opening, and thanks for the game you posted, 

Some thoughts on your comments, 

(1) and (3): I prefer going for a King's Indian Attack formation despite the fact that I could get an earlier advantage say with 1... d4. It's a set up I am used to, I know how to play it and usually gives me good positions. I believe that at my level a slight advantage in the opening is not that crucial. 

As for the Najdorf, you are right, it is an opening I try to learn and I test it in my daily online games, I rarely use it OTB

I find that saving time with this set up instead of playing 1.e4  wi ch can be answered in various waysthat require theory knowledge and calculation from the 4th move is beneficial, as i have more time to build a plan. It also saves time for me In order to study middle game plans instead of studying openings.

Of course I made  opening mistakes and inaccurancies that I have to work through, but my problem is that I got a position that I am familiar with, got an advantage and then blew it away. To be more precise you are right that Qe1 is not the best move but there is no big problem with the backward capture I believe after Rb1 (though Qd1 would be better) (12...Nxc2 13.Qc3 Nd4).

(2) I agree with your points, but those are about  my opponent's moves, I didn't get 6... Bg4 neither 8 .. h6. 

In this game, as in many others I may did not gain advantage in the opening but after move 22 I have a playable position. In 22 black has only one decent move (Qe6), all the rest give white advantage if I am not wrong. So I thought that I should focus in other parts of the game instead of openings due to the fact that it is common I lose or draw after I get a winning position. 

Again, thanks a lot for your time and our feedback.

At the Havana tournament in 1965, GM Boris Ivkov was on the verge of the greatest success of his entire career. Having beaten both Smyslov and Fischer in earlier rounds, Ivkov was in sole possession of the lead with two rounds left to go, and was paired against the tail-ender Garcia. He won the exchange, then started picking off one Pawn after another. It looked like Ivkov had both the game and the tournament all wrapped up.

What could go wrong?...

Whenever I feel bad about blundering away a won game, I just play over Garcia vs Ivkov, Havana 1965. Black's 36th move always cheers me up.

I might indeed be an idiot, but at least I'm not Borislav Ivkov.

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1063717

Thank you both of you for your advice and feedback!

blueemu: Yes, this makes me feel better, I have also lost a winning position once not noticing a mate in weak dark squares around my king. SInce then I always check this possibility

DeirdreSkye: It is not exactly that I was over-confident it is much worse. When the Knight moved at d5 in move 22 I thought, "nice it cuts off the queen from the defence of f7...". Having this fixed position in my mind I calculated AS THOUGH it was still there after it moved. I don't know why this kind of "blind spot" occured. I should, as you say, have taken a deep breath, look calmly and then play.

My other probem was my play after the blunder. The game could be saved but I lost it. I find myself messing up simplified positions, not pure endgames but "early endgames" or "late middlegames". I don't know why, I tend to do better in complicated positions than simplified ones. 

I am currently studying this book: https://www.amazon.com/Practical-Endgame-Play-definitive-endgames/dp/1857445554, . It focuses in this area.

This is called "the retained image". There was a book I read many years ago that categorized and analyzed all the different types of blunder.

I see. I could say that is the most usual blunder that I make. This could be a very usefull conclusion for further improvement. 

About the endgame, these are the things to concentrate on:

1) king activity (activate ur king & restrict ur opponent king)

2) rook on 7th or 2nd rank (and open file)

3) passed pawn (put the rook behind it)

4) loose pawns (doubles, isolated or backwards)

This opening is completely fine for you. In fact it is black who makes a serious inaccuracy by playing 6...Bg4 and giving away his bishop's pair. Other moves would have given black an edge, but that is not meaningful at your level.

I am not going to go through all moves but only some which stand out.

19 f4 is an unnatural move, the logical continuation is 19 Qe2 with the idea of playing Rd1 to challenge the open d-file. Also Rfd8 is answered by Bd4 forcing black to give away the exchange. So black should retreat the rook allowing you to play Rd1.

Black's decision to take on f4 is also bad. Simply ignoring it and playing Rfd8 is better. The pawn can be recaptured after Nd7 (Bf4 Qe6) and black is the only one playing for a win. The knight is well-placed on e5 and the e4 pawn is blocked making white's white-squared bishop worse. If white trades bishop for knight, the opposite color bishop endgame favors black.

33 e6 is premature and your idea seems to be to trade black square bishops with that move, which is really really bad. The bishops work well together and cover lots of squares. Almost any other sensible move is better, Kf3 bringing king to centre, Rf2 to defend against Rd2 or Rh1. White is much better in that position if not winning.

Nunquam thank you, your observations are very close to my analysis and very usefull.

converting winning positions is one of the hardest things for a player to do at all levels. Gm's today still will botch a winning position from time to time especially in lower time controls

If it takes more than one move thats ,winning losing positions.

Improving alone is always tough that's why it's good you came to the forum to find help!  We have our own FREE and private groups for players looking to connect with other players with similar ratings!

Our Exclusive (and FREE) Community for people willing to improve their game along with people in their rating group.

You will be required to submit quality chess work each week and so will everyone else in your community.

Anyone who doesn't contribute consistently doesn't belong in this club and will be kicked out.

So ask yourself one question: How serious are you about improving?

OrlandoChessClub@gmail.com

At the end of move 25, you were a rook up and you had the initiative. When you're up this much of material, play things safe (though not passively); don't enter complicated lines/tactics/sacrifices when you have a huge material advantage. At move twenty six, you overlooked the backwards queen move that wins back your rook; don't worry, sometimes I also make those blunders, especially with regard to backwards moves. We should look carefully and consider all defenders/attackers (including the defenders' potential backwards moves) of a square before moving there.

I hope this helps.

Please watch this video to get some Chess skills and motivation.

https://youtu.be/HeVg5To5j4w.