@coneheadzombie hey i don't drop queens it was a mouse slip. I'm capable of following strong games and I understand why gm's move the way they do ( if there's a commentator ). But watching and doing are two different things. I'm gonna stop watching famous games and pick up a book I guess. Is there one most 1500+ players like? My goal is to reach 1500 within 6 months. ( i'm prob around 1200 )
Hey everyone here's a game I played this morning. It was a 5 min game. The reason I'm posting this one is cause even though there were a few obvious blunders my oponent's rating was smaller than mine and I was hoping to crush him, yet I struggled until the end. I have a feeling my thought process is totally wrong, i'd like to change the way I think about my moves instead of memorizing openings. I'm hoping to hear from 1500+ players! Thanks in advance. PS he had a few seconds left on the clock so he resigned.
I know it's just a blitz game, but he just wants to hear some ideas I think.
8.cxd5 may not be bad, but you're letting black have easy equality IMO. For example why not Bd3... black doesn't really want to take on c4 making you move your bishop again because his center (and development) would be less. So move 8 is very unambitious... black didn't want to take on c4 anyway (at least not right away).
Why did you play 9.Bb5+ if you weren't going to take his knight? I mean, retreating is fine too, but the way you played it just let him get some tempo expanding on the queenside.
b3 was not the square for the bishop. It's decentralized and "biting on granit" as they say, on the d5 pawn.
14.Rad1 I don't understand this move. With Bb3 and Rd1 it seems you're wanting to play e4 to open up for your bishops, but your control of e4 is not enough. This idea seems very slow and your pieces seem a bit disorganized as a result.
17.cxb4 is bad in general because it's opening up the a file for black against your pawn. You'd really rather leave the tension or push it to c4.
20.Qf4 wins a pawn. Always be aware of the undefended pieces your opponent has.
21. f4 is a fundamentally poor move. Now e4 is a hole not to mention an immediate strong outpost for his knight. Also e3 is a backward pawn which black can pressure. Ask not only what your moves do for you, but how your opponent may try to exploit them. The key features of this position (before your 21st move) are black's b4 and d5 pawns which can be maneuvered against (attack them). f4 has nothing to do with th is evaluation (and actually hurts your position).
22.g4 is fundamentally bad too, it gives black a reason to hope when before he had no clear counter to your plan of targeting his isolated pawns.
26.h4 was a passing move, it does nothing. To make it worse your e pawn is hanging.
The rest of the game is a bit silly, so I'll just stop there.
wait haha are you saying i'm an ad? I wish. Not sure what I would be selling.
I was referring to post #15 (the one just above mine).
Unfortunately his entries have been seeming a bit canned of late.
@waffllemaster thanks! Your input was so valuable. I had no idea I made that many mistakes. But still don't see a better 21st move. Both b4 and d5 are protected (even though they're isolated ) and his knights are controlling the center. Don't see how I have enough pieces to attack those pawns. Does anyone see a better 21st move for white? I was trying to chase his knight away from the center..
I'm gonna post a serious game next week, hope waffllmaster is gonna be around, I learned a lot from his post.
I'm glad you found it useful :)
Just to show how the pieces could coordinate without giving black anything to do himself:
@waffllemaster nice! Looks good, totally makes sense. I think i get the idea now. To look for opponent's weaknesses and minimize yours. I was looking for a general idea of attack and this seems like a good foundation. Look for his weakness and attack and keep your pieces protected. I'm gonna post a real game next week, this one is silly. @mhchess13 i drop my queens like you drop your "R"s.
Up to move 20 you played fine and at that point, as waffle points out, you have some big pluses. Your opponent had two isolated pawns sitting in the middle of wide open spaces just asking to be attacked.
There is a principle which says that you should ordinarily look to play where you enjoy the most space. OK that principle relies upon your opponent being more cramped and it is not entirely clear in your game that your opponent is cramped on the queen side so open is it. Nevertheless I feel that most players 1500 and above would be looking for ideas on the queen side in the position reached at move 20 whereas you embarked upon manoevres that opened lines to your king in a part of the board where you enjoyed no particular advantage and which afforded no immediate tactical opportunity.
So the question you might ask yourself is why? What attracted you to the kingside?
I'll hazard a guess as to one element. You were looking to crush your opponent. Perhaps you undervalue pawns. Winning one of those queen side pawns might not seem "crushing".
A game is often about one side accumulating and gradually expanding small advantages. If you can consistently pick up the sort of advantages you gathered in your first 20 moves and work on how to expand the small advantages into a slightly larger ones I think both your tactics and your strategy will improve a bit.
For myself I'd work at it while playing rather than by study. But if study is your bag look at some master games with commentary and see is you can pick up on what advantage the winner worked on and how they gradually expanded that advantage.
Good luck. :)
Thank you Johnyodell! I wish i had read your post before playing my last game. I feel like I made the same mistakes. I lost to a much higher rated player. Thanks for your analysis, it helps a lot, I think we should stop talking about that silly game though, it's embarassing to have all these strong players analyzing that silly blitz but I learned a lot. Really quick, the game I played after that one was this loss: ( did i lose because of my move 16 (h4) ? Was that a bad move? I have a feeling I made the mistake you were just talking about, wish i'd read your post before playing that game.
38)...Rh1+ 39) Kg2 Qh2 and mate. Yes, just a bit silly.
At least play Game in 5/5 (or slower) and buy yourself a couple decent chess books, if you want to improve.
h4 is brave but far from a losing move.
I am over cautious about disturbing the pawns in front of my king. I feel comfortable with them sitting there undisturbed, closing off the lines and ready to slow down and maybe altogether halt a direct attack. But if conditions are right the attacking potential of those pawns may be more valuable than their defensive qualities. King's Indian Defence players often throw them forward with enthusiasm.
What are the right conditions? You may need a better player's comment on that but two elements are a closed centre and easier access to the king's side for your pieces than your opponents.
In your game the centre is closed and, despite your opponent being able to bring his bishop across so quickly, I rather think that your knight was better adapted to play on the king side than the bishop.
Your game started to go downhill when you withdrew your black bishop (that needed to be exchanged for your opponent's fianchettoed bishop) and then gave up your h pawn for nothing. After exchanging bishops I like the idea of advancing that pawn to h6. Look at the position arising after 17.BxB KxB 18.h6 and see what attacking possibilities exist for you . The idea you tried of Ng2 now looks interesting. And if you can play g4 g5 at sany point the pawn on h6 will start to be a monster. I doubt you are winning but you have an initiative.
When you were considering Bf6 did you ask yourself "what move will he make next". If you did then I am a bit surprised that you either did not see f6 or thought that you had a good response. If you did not ask yourself the question then that is what you must train yourself to do in order to improve.
i thought bxf6 was my prettiest move?! If g4 first i lose a pawn am i wrong here? @zborg the game was over by then i was tryin to win by clock he had seconds left. Btw just watching an Anand/Carson game and realized i had it all wrong. It's not about finding that bobby fisher type killer move i keep searching for, it's about a lot of boring moves that dont create any weaknesses. ( no disrespect to the GMs ).
sent from my iphone
play e4 openings, more tactical
@Tera that's not funny
@johnny_r I think Tera actually has a very good point; if you're trying to improve your game, the first thing you have to do is practice tactical vision. This is easier to do if you play openings that are more reliant on tactics, as opposed to positional maneuvering, and e4 is definitely a better way to go about that. Look into the closed sicilian, and the kings indian attack against the french/pirc if you're trying to avoid moves and moves of opening theory. Avoiding theory vs e5 is harder, but the Bishops opening/vienna game is definitely a way to go. Like you said yourself, you're looking for chess fundamentals--open positions give you a chance to practice those fundamentals much more than closed or semi-closed games. You should look at a book called "attacking with e4" by John Emms. It looks at systems instead of lines in the opening, and I think you may be surprised by how much easier it is to play those positions.
Im serious actually.
Also, watch chess youtube channels before you go to sleep :-D
ok, thanks Tera and David, i'll pick up the book. I feel like there's a lot I dont know about the game but my raw brain power is there. I'll read the book and report back. My coffee shop buddies are ranked around 1500 so looking at kicking their butts in 3 to 6 months :) i know it's possible.