this = good
halo = bad
My first analysis
Sort:
I dont agree with 7. .. Kf8, would be Bd7, you lost castle and that rook dies at the 23th move
May 14, 2008
0
#4
Well, both sides didn't play soundly. Having said that, your strategy was poor basically because you used too many pawn moves in the opening, especially since white had not made any commitment by way of castling. I mean, his king is in the center and you started a queenside attack with your pawns. Well, white could stay in the center or castle away from the assault and later exploit your queenside weaknesses. In this game, however, white decided to push for the attack on the opposite wing, with success. I didn't like white's idea of allowing the dark bishop to be traded, but it didn't prove to be costly. What was costly for you was not protecting your king sufficiently, especially since white has denied you castling. I would have to say, therefore, that the strategy was doomed to failure. By the way, a piece is not hung if it is not attacked.
This is my first game analysis, and realized most of my mistakes doing the annotation. My question to the forum is whether my overall strategy was sound or doomed to failure.
Basically I attempted a modern defense in response to a very classical occupation of the center. I countered a clogged center with a slow, deliberate attack on the flanks, covering myself every step of the way and forcing a retreat. I made a sacrifice attack against a strong bishop and thought I had the advantage. My plan unraveled I think to a lack of focus more than positional disadvantage.
Comments?