anyone?
was my winning attack sound?
Sort:
Qf3 would work I think
g-man15 wrote:
I won this game with an attack that i sacrificed plenty of material to build. but was it as sound as i thought at the time. i cannot personally find a line that would have allowed him to keep the advantage, but maybe there is one?
I hate to be critical, but your sacrifices were unsound. Basically, White had a huge advantage until 18.cxd4??, which lost immediately.
ok, KM, can i see some analysis to back that statement? i'm asking cause i'm sure what you are saying is correct. but i personally don't see the line that proves it.
18. Qf3 defiently
No it wasnt sound, white blundered into defeat.
yes skotheim, I see what you mean. it is a killer defense. had he played that, i would have been crushed. fortunetly for me, he didn't spot it, and i took the game.
and thank you skotheim, for being the only one to actually give me the winning defense and not just say "No, your attack wasn't sound". you were a great help skotheim.
No problem.
Isn't 17 Qf3 illegal because he's in check? My suggestion would've been 17 Be3 returning some material to close down the e file.
White is not in check in move 18.
Anyhow, a bad plan is better than no plan!
yep, and this game kinda proves that doesn't it. my plan was pretty bad, but it still bagged me the win (due to a blunder by my opponent). had i gone on with no plan at all, it would have just been a slow defeat for sure.
Hmm...I think 18.Kc2 wins too. The point here is that you lost way too much material, so as long as white doesn't get mated, he should be winning.
18. Kc2 is a little scary if you look at some of the checks. But I am sure that it is winning for white aswell.
Apr 1, 2015
0
#19
White was wasting queen and knight moves without developing his queenside bishop and knight. At 6.Bxc6 white removes his white bishop on that diagonal and makes it a problem for him to castle, which evidently he never can.
These are the main issues I see more than the fact black "sacrificed" material. The "success" of this relied on the fact that white never developed his pieces. I don't think it would make sense to analyze this game as if a sacrificial strategy were happening here because these moves look impulsive. That's just my analysis!
dragonair234 wrote:
White was wasting queen and knight moves without developing his queenside bishop and knight. At 6.Bxc6 white removes his white bishop on that diagonal and makes it a problem for him to castle, which evidently he never can.
These are the main issues I see more than the fact black "sacrificed" material. The "success" of this relied on the fact that white never developed his pieces. I don't think it would make sense to analyze this game as if a sacrificial strategy were happening here.
i never said either side played well. the question was, at move 18, could white have found an effective move to save himself. the answer is, Yes.
and what was happening, if not a sacrificial strategy? did i not sacrifice my bishop? did i not have a follow up plan ready? what else do you want before you'd consider it a sacrificial strategy?
I won this game with an attack that i sacrificed plenty of material to build. but was it as sound as i thought at the time. i cannot personally find a line that would have allowed him to keep the advantage, but maybe there is one?