this type of pawn storm ok in blitz?

  • #1

    Completely left my king on his own by move 22..

    Did I get lucky this game or is this totally acceptable in blitz? I think i've seen this in bullet.



  • #2

    great play!!

  • #3

    Though pushing kingside pawns creates weaknesses in your territory, if your opponent cannot exploit them then it's not negative for you.

    You gained space on the kingside with those pawn moves, and your pieces were better positioned than your opponents' to control those weakened squares.

  • #4

    Thanks! I guess if the opponent can't get to my king he doesn't need defense even if the queens are still on the board. Hard to believe but seems to be the case.

  • #5

    On move 33 Qxc8+

  • #6
  • #7

    Pushing pawns gives you control over squares.

    Controlling squares has responsibilities.

    Since pushing pawns always leaves weaknesses, no matter how small, you have a responsibility to protect yourself if you come under siege due to these weaknesses.

    With great power comes great responsibility.

  • #8

    In blitz, pawn storms are especially effective. Attacks are easier to play than defenses. If you are white and your opponent castles before you do, consider it a green light to attack with a pawn storm! And even if you have both castled on the same wing, as in here, you can often get a killer pawn storm going.

    Don't over-analyse your blitz games. The object of the game is to win. It's ok to win ugly.

  • #9

    @SmyslovFan wrote "Don't over-analyse your blitz games".. I've heard that the best way to improve is by looking at your games through a microscope. Maybe I've heard wrong by there's a rumor that it's better to do that than to study the classics or memorize openings.

  • #10

    Well, what is your title question asking exactly?  Doesn't seem to mean much of anything.

  • #11
    johnny_r wrote:

    @SmyslovFan wrote "Don't over-analyse your blitz games".. I've heard that the best way to improve is by looking at your games through a microscope. Maybe I've heard wrong by there's a rumor that it's better to do that than to study the classics or memorize openings.

    Well first of all your title asks if it's good in the context of blitz... not if it's good objectively.  This is sort of anti-analysis.  You mention putting games under a microscope, sure, that's when you try to get to the truth of a position, not find out if it was good in a biltz game lol.

    And the point of analysing games (and you're right, this is a good practice) is to be able to fix your thinking as well as learn new patterns.  In blitz there is no real thinking, so you're just learning patterns... in which case it's better to ask these kinds of questions about master games you've played through because these patterns are worth remembering.  Blitz patterns not so much...

  • #12

    thanks yeres30 and wafflemaster. Andy i guess i'm still looking for hard rules and it seems like there are ideas in chess but not many rules and the existing ones are often broken. I used to always keep my king surrounded with pawns in blitz and was surprised to win the above game cause I broke my own rule. So I was simply asking if that rule even existed.

Top
or Join

Online Now