You should have taken the exchange on move 22. Your plan was working and then you gave up on it. What good would the pin of the pawn have done when there were only two rooks left in the game?
You would have been up three pawns and had a rook and pawn ending. It should be a very easy win, especially when your rook would already be centralized, and your king could easily cover the open file.
Mate - sympathies, since I have done the same often enuf: extracting a loss from a total winning position.
I'm a low-rater too (1600s), but for what it is worth, in the endgame the K is vital. Even after creating the passed pawn, getting your K across (probably in six consequtive K moves) would have saved the win. The other option was to prevent his K becoming active on the Q-side by pushing your own pawns, probably starting with f.
oi vey; chess(!*
No, I cannot believe!-
You dominated your opponent completly after very well play. And then you lost the game.-
You missed to let your pawns go forward!That`s really pity!
One diadram for winning:
Another winning position:
And a drawing position:
Yea, that was a really bad game on my part, but Thanks for the comments. I see now that I should have just blitzed with the pawns. My endgame is a little weak I suppose, but all in all the game was a fluke. Thanks for all the help.
Here is a game I played with someone rated 200 points below me but lost, I think it is because of the danger of the passed pawn, but I will let you tell me just how bad It was and if you think my annotations are accurate. Any tips to help me prevent this from happening again are greatly appreciated.