Please comment!
Sort:
18 Na4 loses a piece to ...b5 19 Nxc5 bxc4.
21 Nxe6 loses a piece to ...Bxe6.
3. … Qf6?! – Just plain weird. Bc5 or Nf6 are preferable.
8. … Kd7? – Bb6 is far more natural.
9. Be3 – It’s not bad but there is a tactic here! Nxf7!
15. At this point, material is even but black is far worse. Two sets of doubled pawns is an endgame nightmare.
18. Na4? – Leaving a simple black tactic.
18. … b5! – Forking the knight and bishop.
19. … Bc8? – Take the piece man!
20. … Kb6! – It’s rather hard to see this move, good job.
21. … Ne7? – Sickening. I have no comment, you can see the blunder.
23. … Rg8? – And I quickly begin to realize that annotating this game is useless.
24. cxb5! – Judging by the quality of this game this move was probably very hard to find.
28. Rg5 – This game was almost worth watching, a draw would have been hilarious.
30. Re8? – Missing a simple mate in 1, Rd5#
My comments: I haven’t checked the ratings yet but I would estimate that white was about an 1100 player with black possibly being around 800. The key to improvement at this level is not to have games analyzed, that just wastes the time of everyone. If you want to get better at this level, just keep playing and stop hanging pieces! Sorry if this analysis sounds harsh but the game was particularly poor, the thread title promised something better.
-Matt
No they were just about even, but I am not sure what to say about this loss
RedSoxpawn wrote: No they were just about even, but I am not sure what to say about this loss
I agree with you too.
ih8sens wrote:
3. … Qf6?! – Just plain weird. Bc5 or Nf6 are preferable.
8. … Kd7? – Bb6 is far more natural.
9. Be3 – It’s not bad but there is a tactic here! Nxf7!
15. At this point, material is even but black is far worse. Two sets of doubled pawns is an endgame nightmare.
18. Na4? – Leaving a simple black tactic.
18. … b5! – Forking the knight and bishop.
19. … Bc8? – Take the piece man!
20. … Kb6! – It’s rather hard to see this move, good job.
21. … Ne7? – Sickening. I have no comment, you can see the blunder.
23. … Rg8? – And I quickly begin to realize that annotating this game is useless.
24. cxb5! – Judging by the quality of this game this move was probably very hard to find.
28. Rg5 – This game was almost worth watching, a draw would have been hilarious.
30. Re8? – Missing a simple mate in 1, Rd5#
My comments: I haven’t checked the ratings yet but I would estimate that white was about an 1100 player with black possibly being around 800. The key to improvement at this level is not to have games analyzed, that just wastes the time of everyone. If you want to get better at this level, just keep playing and stop hanging pieces! Sorry if this analysis sounds harsh but the game was particularly poor, the thread title promised something better.
-Matt
At the time when I played, I was at around 1100. chesslv was somewhere a little more than 1200. Do you think it makes sense for our playing ability?
He just said your opponent played like an 800. Only a 400 point inaccuracy.
Next time you annotate one of ih8sens' games, just comment that he is playing "possibly at the 1300 level".
so good
i love watching these splendid games dudes
ih8sens wrote: Sorry if this analysis sounds harsh but the game was particularly poor, the thread title promised something better.
-Matt
Matt, what did you read into the thread title (i.e. "Please comment")??
Anyhow, I think you made valuable comments on the game.
Pillsbury_Doughboy wrote: ih8sens wrote:
3. … Qf6?! – Just plain weird. Bc5 or Nf6 are preferable.
8. … Kd7? – Bb6 is far more natural.
9. Be3 – It’s not bad but there is a tactic here! Nxf7!
15. At this point, material is even but black is far worse. Two sets of doubled pawns is an endgame nightmare.
18. Na4? – Leaving a simple black tactic.
18. … b5! – Forking the knight and bishop.
19. … Bc8? – Take the piece man!
20. … Kb6! – It’s rather hard to see this move, good job.
21. … Ne7? – Sickening. I have no comment, you can see the blunder.
23. … Rg8? – And I quickly begin to realize that annotating this game is useless.
24. cxb5! – Judging by the quality of this game this move was probably very hard to find.
28. Rg5 – This game was almost worth watching, a draw would have been hilarious.
30. Re8? – Missing a simple mate in 1, Rd5#
What is all this? i dont get it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
My comments: I haven’t checked the ratings yet but I would estimate that white was about an 1100 player with black possibly being around 800. The key to improvement at this level is not to have games analyzed, that just wastes the time of everyone. If you want to get better at this level, just keep playing and stop hanging pieces! Sorry if this analysis sounds harsh but the game was particularly poor, the thread title promised something better.
-Matt
At the time when I played, I was at around 1100. chesslv was somewhere a little more than 1200. Do you think it makes sense for our playing ability?
whats this
ID
bye bye!
c u later
ih8sens wasn't being harsh. It isn't the best of games, but you clearly out played your opponent. It was pretty funny how messed up his pawns were at move 15. I got a pretty good laugh out of that. And Harry07, don't spam like a retard plz.
Black played a very funny game.
Looks like someone already said everything.
I'm currently improving pretty fast now. I'm now at the mid to high 1300s. Am I good for my rating?