Post your game for expert analysis

Hi Koravi... posting rules: Human v Human, 30 minutes per side or more, rated < 2000.   You are a very good player and I don't have the necessary range to help you.  Would you be interested in analyzing your game for us?

Here's a pretty good game I had yesterday at 45/45 that I wanted to analyse.  I'm playing black. I think it's standard opening moves up to 7. ... Re8?!

The computer recommended
( 7... b6 8. a3 Bb7 9. d5 Nc5 10. Bxc5 bxc5 11. Bb5 with a slight advantage for white.

Frankly I just never win when I fianchetto my bishop in this position. So I wanted to try something different.

The computers continuation from move 7:

( 7... Re8 8. e5 dxe5 9. Nxe5 a6 10. f3 Nxe5 11. dxe5 ) With a moderate advantage for white.

I was afraid of 8. e5, but didn't know what else to do.  In the main lines the computer found, that move proves to misplace the rook.


The game proceeds up to 18. exf5, which over the board I felt was a huge mistake.

The situation on the queenside was precarious and the last thing I was planning was to advance on the next turn and lock up the center.  I was expecting basically anything but this capture.

I was really worried about my king at this point and thought white would move to open lines with 18. Ra1.  This locks my bishop in defense and if I advance 18. ... a5. 19. bxa5 bxa5 20 Nb5, aiming to advance the c-pawn and boot the blocking Knight.

The computer didn't like my response,
18. ... Bxf5?!, recommending
( 18... e4 19. Nh4 gxf5 20. Qg3 f4 21. Qxf4 Bxc3 22. Bh5 ) ( 18... Bxf5 19. Qd2 a5 20. bxa5 Rxa5 21. Ra1 e4 22. Nd4 )

Looking at this position it looks fine, but there's no way I would think of that over the board.  It feels to dangerous.

I felt that developing the Bishop with tempo and the attack on the pawn would allow to build more threats.


The computer continuation from this line is:


( 18... Bxf5 19. Qd2 a5 20. bxa5 Rxa5 21. Ra1 e4 22. Nd4 ) with an even game.  I really don't like this because it creates a fight on the Queenside and gives squares to whites pieces.  The continuation that actually happened is much better:


19. Qc1 e4 20. Nd4 Rf7?! And again the computer wants to give free counterplay to my opponent: ( 20... Qe8 21. Qd2 Bd7 22. Rfe1 a5 23. bxa5 Rxa5 24. Ra1 )


21. Nc6 Qh4

I see the chance to starte building threats.  White has to save his Knight on c3 and worry about attacks on his King.

22. Qe3 Raf8 23. Bxa6

And now I'm committed to this attack.

Bg4 24. Rde1 Bf3?!


The computer didn't like this move, recommending


( 24... Nf5 25. Qf4 Nd4 26. Qg3 Qxg3 27. hxg3 Nxc6 28. Rxe4 ) with a decisive advantage for Black.  I didn't see this, all I was trying to do is avoid trading Queens while maintaining my threats.

The computers continuation from my move:

25. Ne2 Bxg2 26. Qg3 Qxg3 27. hxg3 Bxf1 28. Rxf1 Rf3 ) ( 25. Nxe4 Bxe4 26. f3 Bxc2 27. Qd2 Bb3 28. Qd3 Ba2 ) is winning also, the game continues:


25. Nxe4?


Over the board I thought this was as good a move as any.

( 25. Ne2 Bxg2 26. Qg3 Qxg3 27. hxg3 Bxf1 28. Rxf1 Rf3 )


The computer continuation:


25. Nxe4 Bxe4 26. f3 Bxc2 27. Qd2 Bb3 28. Qd3 Ba2 wins a piece, but I'm going for the win:


25... Bh6 26. Qd4 Nxe4 27. gxf3??

( 27. Ne5 Bxg2 28. Nxf7 Rxf7 29. Kxg2 Qg4+ 30. Kh1 Ng3+ ) And I'm much better off than what the computer wanted on move 25.

27... Bf4 and it's over.


Other than move 8, I really don't think any of the computer continuations are better than what I did. Thoughts anyone? 

This is actually the first time I've ever analyzed one of my games.  If you can't tell I'm terrible at tactics, I just try to make the best move and build threats so it's easier to calculate.

Wow, thanks for your thoughtful comments!

6... Nb6 Some better players like Ivanchuk and Gelfand? Wow, those men are definitely not only better than me, they are incomparably better. They understand chess so much better than I do that it is best to say that they play a different game of chess. :-)

19... a6 would have been much better than 19... Ne8. I can see that now.

Very good idea on move 30 to exchange the light squared bishop for the knight in order to lessen the pressure on the black field e5.

I agree with you that I should have exchanged my dark squard bishop on move 39 with the knight.

Thank you very much!

Hi Tipoliani.  Your opponent was very high quality. You felt comfortable at the exact moment when your opponent started winning (you can tell by his moves that he knew he was winning).  There were some thematic ideas in there that could have been used, but I think the biggest take-away is - if you are going to beat a GM you'll have to become comfortable with complications.

Great analysis !

I got some new ideas now and looking  forward to apply them !

Thank you for the time you devoted .

It is higly appreciated !

best regards, 

Sorry, I must ask you to anylyse oneother my game

I am playing black. Where did white go wrong in this game?

@jeffreyd600: how would you have won? I only see draws or advantage for white.

I'll be on this evening to post a few games.  Things got busy with work!

I was quite surprised when white resigned this match, I thought it was fairly even. Engine says black does have a lead, though, albeit a slim one.

No zugzwang, but black just picks up all the pawns from c2-a2, and have a winning advantage I think

honestly in that one, White played very poorly and not as agressively as he should have. it is the kings gambit and he is supposed to fight for the advantage.

my two questions are:

1)could I have won this match any faster ?

2)why did the opponent sacrifice his knight at the end of the game ? he could have atleast managed to save the time by moving it to the legal square.

and, please provide a brief report of the match.

By the way I am black in this game.

Well, I know that I had a great advantage over my opponent by the time I put his queen out of the game and confined his rook in the corner. However, my opponent managed to get the rook our towards the end of the game. I am pretty sure that I made some mistakes in regards to allowing that to happen, but I am not sure what mistakes I made. Was there faster way for me to win this game? If so, how?

@starvos

Thanks for your opinion but, I personally think developing my pieces are my major priority. I personally don't think opening matters much anyway.

@stavros

I challenge you to a match , what's the reply ?

let's see whether you can prove that openings are Important. personally, I don't care about my opening play much. my idea is to develop my pieces as safe as possible in a short amount of moves.

no, that's not the reason. you underestimated my thinking prowess. I want to show my full potential to you. I just had a look, your blitz rating is 1895 so, I think you will be more than worth my opponent. so, it's your call whether you are up for a match or not.

Question: What do the numbers (e.g., -1.81) refer to that are posted after each move in games that I have the computer analyze? I recognize that blunders have larger negative scores, but many of the "agreed" upon moves are low or negative point values.