I'm not if this helps but...
36. Rdxd6 or Rfxd6 wins a pawn
And that could of helped... correct me if I'm wrong, just a thought though.
My Best Draw
Sort:
this is just my opinion on good and bad bishops.first i was taught that a good bishop is one that is not blocked by his own central pawns and can be very mobile.and a bad bishop is the total opposite(one that i blocked and hindered by his own pawns of the same color.) hope that helps a little.
"I was aware that I wanted to trade pieces so thet my opponent couldn't make any crazy tactical moves."
If your aim is to diffuse the position so that your opponent cannot win, then achieving your goal means you will not win either.
7. Nxc6 gives back control of the d5 square to black.
I think black may have been a little off when going for all those exchanges starting at move 16. Black's idea is probably that with the minor pieces traded the isolated e-pawn will be weak. But taking your bad bishop on d3 makes the pawn no longer isolated.
22. ... f5 is just a mistake.
I wouldn't have played 28. f6. 28. R1e4 neutralizes the a-pawn push. Allowing hte pawns to be traded makes your position less dynamic and decreases your winning chances. After R1e4 you have plenty of time to find a good spot for your king before rushing your pawns too quickly.
I don't like 33. d4 (and don't think it would have been useful on move 32 earlier since it doesn't prevent ... c5). You could just bring your king to d5. If black pushes the d pawn before you get there, you just swing a rook to the a-file.
Aug 17, 2008
0
#5
< 5. Nc3 "...We are currently at B33, the Sicilian Defense: Lasker-Pelikan Variation.">
Not quite, if black responds with 5... e5 then it would be a lasker-pelikan. Right now its still to be decided which sicilian it is.
<5... d6 And now we leave the books...>
This is still very much book. The "classical variation" I believe, with much theory to its name.
<6. f3 "...I think that a better move would have been Be3...">
6. Be3 is answered nicely by 6... Ng4
<7. Nxc6>
This does not look good at all. You gain time, but strengthen his center and cover up his hole on d5. It would be worth it if that "time" led to something, but you never really got to anything active during the game.
<16. Qd2-17.Qf2> currently, both his minor pieces are better placed than yours, so going into an endgame would be disadvantageous. It doesn't matter if you're opponent is better tactically than you. You needed complication. you needed your queen on the board.
<18... Ke7? This move was quite unexpected, possible a blunder to not castle and defend the f-file. I don't know why black did that. Do you?>
Normally a blunder would lose you the game lol. He just wants to keep his king in the center for an endgame. A king needs to be active in the endgame, so tucking it away by castling would be kind of silly.
~~~
On moves 20-21 all the minor pieces were traded, and I'm surprised a 2158 didn't recognize a superior minor piece ending with 20...Bxe2! where as 20...Nxd3 looks like a mistake, trading his very strong knight for a sickly bishop.
In truth, I don't understand 22...f5 myself. It just looks like a blunder to me, and it should have won you the game (The game looked equal before that.) if you need any help understanding good/bad bishops, or superior minor pieces, feel free to send me a message on the matter. Good game, considering how much stronger your opponent was.
Hey Everybody,
I just finished a very long game with ChekM8, which ended in a draw, a significant improvement from the first game I played with him. I spent hours with the analysis board trying to find a winning situation, but couldn't seem to push it out. Granted, a draw with that kind of rating differential isn't bad. And I was successful in avoiding pit falls. Does anybody have any ideas for me? I'm curious as to what some of the more advanced players (e.g. THCCKINGJON or MM78) have to say? Bear in mind that throught the game, I was aware that I wanted to trade pieces so thet my opponent couldn't make any crazy tactical moves.
-SP