This is the best game I think I have ever played and I was hoping for an analysis from the players of chess.com. Thanks!
My best game
Sort:
[edit: removed some erranous commentary after looking at the board a second time, and realizing that the white queen was, in fact, a queen, and not a bishop. 
]
Well played.
As for your opening, I play the dutch defense myself, and would not personally fianchetto the darksquare bishop - 2..g6 seems to me to weaken the kingside unnecessarily, especially since you plan to castle there.
10.b6? was a mistake - Now the knight is only guarded by the bishop that's also guarding e6 - white only needs to capture the knight, and after you take back with the bishop, take the e6 pawn and fork your rook and queen.
Up until white's mistake with 15.Rh3, at least, white was better. Well done for winning the game. 
May 31, 2009
0
#3
Stegocephalian wrote:
[edit: removed some erranous commentary after looking at the board a second time, and realizing that the white queen was, in fact, a queen, and not a bishop. ]
That's the problem with this 3-d visualisation. It looks nice but it is not functional. It's style over function!! The most important thing is to be able to easily recognize the pieces and if you are going to confuse a queen and a bishop then it makes reading of the whole game difficult. I would like to play through this game - but I am not going to because you chose the 3-d format. It would be just too much work for me.
That said, I do understand that, for some people, the 3-d view may be better and more easy to read. It just isn't for me. It's so horrible I can't bear to play through the game. I wonder whether it wouldn't be better if the user (i.e. the viewer) could choose the format of the display rather than - at current - this choice being made by the poster? This would allow everyone to have the experience they want. Any thoughts?
corum wrote:
Stegocephalian wrote:
[edit: removed some erranous commentary after looking at the board a second time, and realizing that the white queen was, in fact, a queen, and not a bishop. ]
That's the problem with this 3-d visualisation. It looks nice but it is not functional. It's style over function!! The most important thing is to be able to easily recognize the pieces and if you are going to confuse a queen and a bishop then it makes reading of the whole game difficult. I would like to play through this game - but I am not going to because you chose the 3-d format. It would be just too much work for me.
That said, I do understand that, for some people, the 3-d view may be better and more easy to read. It just isn't for me. It's so horrible I can't bear to play through the game. I wonder whether it wouldn't be better if the user (i.e. the viewer) could choose the format of the display rather than - at current - this choice being made by the poster? This would allow everyone to have the experience they want. Any thoughts?
I changed the board format for those unable to see in 3D
May 31, 2009
0
#5
That's really kind of you. It may be just me though - it could be most people prefer the 3-d version?
Anyway, now you have changed it, the least I can do is take a good look at the game :)
Thanks Bastian for the piece-edit - I agree with corum in his preference of the 2D pieces. Clarity over prettiness.
2. ..g6 is only weakening if white continues with an early h4 (and maybe h5). The white placement of the bishop on c4 more or less forces black to play ..d5 sooner or later, but he is at least equal after 4. ..Bg7. Black's kingside isn't really exposed - it is primarily aggressive.
Others have already pointed out the Bxc6 Nxe6 combination, but consider 11. ...Nxd4. If Bxd7, then Nxf3+, but more likely is exd4 ...Bxb5 Nxe6, etc.
