My opponent got so lucky!

Obviously. Go, me!

No, I'm obviously the good guy.  He refused to resign even after I scored a touchdown.

Well, it's not like you won. You failed to utilize your touchdown to its fullest extent.

That's because chess.com forgot to factor a touchdown into their system.  That's really quite a serious bug.

A touchdown, although it gives you some free points, does not factor out into an immediate win.

A touchdown doesn't result in an immediate win, but it should count as extra points at the end of the game.

ChessBoss, this game was extremely complex.  I don't blame you for not understanding it.  I think even Carlsen would struggle to make any sense of it.

But points do not decide the outcome of a game, so although you may have had more points than me, it still ended up as a draw. 

Wow, I read your comment for 2. Ke2 and burst out laughing.

And that was barely 2 moves in.

I have to say that, 8. Qf3!!! was a brilliant move. The king sac would've worked wonders, and even if your opponent captured with the rook, not the pawn, you'd still be able to take with your knight and complete the sac. There is literally no possible way he could've avoided the mate in 2, unless he cheated.

As for 12. c5, the fact that a bishop can not take en passant is appalling to me, an experienced chess player of almost 3 months. I mean, a bishop is the exact same as a pawn except that it can move backwards and as far as it wants, but the fact that it can't move vertically like a pawn makes the two pieces basically equivalent.

The white king's courage is also a good tactic of boosting morale among his troops, and the lesson of morale is also promoted in 44. cxd3 where you remove the opponent's last source of religious guidance.

However, you did make a mistake on 19. Kh8??!. Why didn't you promote h8=B? You were down a bishop, so if you promoted your king into a bishop, you'd have an even better advantage.

55. Be5 was also a good move. Without it, your opponent would be able to move to d6 and protect his knight from capture by your king.

Lastly... why did the computer declare this to be a draw? You had an entire 7 point advantage at the end, with your knight's 4 points and your positional advantage's 5 points. You clearly had a mate in under 50 moves, but nope, stupid computer wanted it to be a draw. I bet it was bribed by your opponent with a stack of luscious computer chips. Chess.com needs to fix its computer engine corruption problem.

Actually, my opponent only had the extra touchdown. I had the knight and positional advantage. If what you say is true, I’ve definitely won this game.

I didn't promote 19. Kh8=B.  A king is obviously better than a bishop.  There is nothing better than a king unless there's a Pope or Emperor piece, so without those, it is obviously not possible to promote a king.

Well, then you could've moved to your side of the board and demoted your king to a bishop.

Of course I could have.  But why would I want to?  The king is obviously better than a bishop.

I find the best trolls are more subtle. It's no good if we get it straight away, it cheapens the transition from annoyance to understanding.

3/10 (for the effort itself)

Hover your mouse over his name, click the exclamation mark (!) and rat him up for trolling

you know reepicheep thatyour opponent made a forum of this game also titled, "My best game Ever"

LOL, go ahead and report me.  No doubt Erik will be so impressed by my game that he'll offer me a job.

Yes, I know he made a forum about this game.  My analysis is better, don't you think?

LMAO wth are you saying this garbage analysis by you is was a -1000 would make! This is was a -1000 performance play by you!!

Junebugs was way better

No it wasn’t

This game was a terrible game, you NEVER bring out your king like that.  There were many forks black could have played.   Your exclamation points are more like blunders.  However, black’s play was crummy