the thought failure that cost me the game was as follows: what subsequent move is made possible by the move my opponent just made? 

15 Re1 makes possible Qxf5  winning a piece 

19 Bxf8  makes possible Qxg7#

Let's make it happen!

One of the reasons my wife chose to use the Caro-Kann was because it resolves the bad bishop prob often found in the French. After 5/-....bf5 & 6/-.....e6 I think your bishops were fine though you still seemed a bit worried about them

thank you Jaglavak. 

Jaglavak, interested to hear your thoughts on suggested alternatives to some of Somebodysson's moves; 9... Qc7 and 11... Nb6 for example.

I have been following this thread with great interest and must say that I've gained more chess knowledge from reading this than many of the books I've read.

Keep up the good work Somebodysson. You certainly have the right attitude to go far in this game. 

Re: Your post #374

Somebodysson you are right. The importance for you in this game is on the quality of play, except for not seeing the mate. Once again pieces can DEFEND BACKWARDS, the B at f8 defends backward the Q at g7 delivering mate. Your notes indicate that you were concentrating on your plans for mate to the exclusion of your opponent's plans. That is why the checklist is indispensable.

By the way what is yor opponent's rating?

I will post my analysis of this game after a couple of posts regarding some issues in your game from post #139.

aronchuck, I went over your every word. The following is a rhetorical question: I wonder what your writing would have been like if you wrote as if you were playing the game!

I have a lot to learn. I will work very hard to apply the thinking process, and esp I will work very hard to ascertain what is my opponent's plan. I will not be as good as you at correctly guessing my opponent's plan; some of your reading of my opponent's plan is way beyond my capacity; you are predicting or imagining (I don't know what the right word is here...you are  proposing?) sequences of moves that I simply cannot do myself at this time. You are reading into my opponent's moves plans that are beyond plans I can predict. I cannot do what I cannot do, but I can at least try to guess what my opponent's plan is, and write it down in my notes. I will do that for the next game. Maybe I will do it again for this game, without consulting your notes, and I'll compare my notes with yours. 

The length of your post is not a problem at all; it is a generosity. I would have a problem with it only if I had a problem with exceptional generosity from highly capable strangers. 

Thank you sir. 

Yaroslavl, yes. I never considered that the B on f8 defended the Q backwards. I did not make that move impulsively. I misevaluated the significance of the B on f8. I thought 'okay, the bishop took the R, but now its out of the action, and for it to be useful would take another couple of moves'. I 'forgot' that is could play a role right where it was, by defending backwards.

I thought of including my opponent's rating, but I decided not to. But since, you ask, and since I am commited to being truthful, it was just slightly higher than mine, about 900, and this opponent had lost all his games for the last two months, and won last night. Just like I had lost all my games for three months, and won a week ago. 

Somebodysson,I really liked your game;it shows great improvement over the previous two you posted!Don't be concerned over the outcome of the game or the mistakes made therein,the important thing is it was clear that you were doing many things right (such as thought process,planning,looking for weaknesses,looking for tactics,etc.).Your ideas are what is important,the successful implimentation will come with practice.So keep up the good work!

I have some thoughts on the game.On moves 3,6,7,and 8 you expressed concern on how to continue,your questions can be answered by  some studying of opening principles.I'm sure chess.com has material on this,otherwise  books like,"How to Play the Chess Openings",which is basically a mongraph will do just fine.This material will allow you to recognize a good opening move/plan from a bad one.

As,far as playing the Caro,I assume this is your first Caro game,if so,then you are at a disadvantage(unless your opponent has also never seen it),the only really effective way to learn an opening is to play it,then review the game against an Openings book or chess engine and see where you went wrong.It typically takes  at least 20-25 games before  you begin to get a handle on how an opening plays.You memorize the lines you chose to play by playing and reviewing them ad nauseum. Your notes are well written and show a marked improvement over what you previously recorded.they give a good insight into what you were thinking at any given point in the game.Your moves 5,11,and 12 show a good beginning at building a sound thought process;even moves 16 to 19 shows that you are taking the right approach.The fact that your final attack failed doesn't really matter,what is important is your had the right idea...you looked for tactical ideas,developed a simple plan,saw how the parts fit together and implimented it,with practice you will become more skillful and successful.

Just as the above mentioned moves showed good things,some others showed where you can improve.Moves 14,15,and 18 are prime examples of problems that need correcting.Re-read those notes and the issues should jump out at you:"Without calculating"..."I looked at this for precisely one second"..."I decide that my rook is expendable",and so forth.

Move 5 had an interesting twist,you were debating some position elements of c5,thinking it a weakening(or simply weak) move.In actuality,c5 is pinned aginst the queen.I mention this because of the earlier discussion about gambits and openings,and your desire to steer clear of highly tactical lines.In this case,advancing c5 could lead to an exchange of queens,which almost always will slow down the tactical pace of the game.This would seem to suit your needs.There were other minor pins in the game,nothing that wins anything,but would annoy white by forcing white to burn moves dealing with them,this also slow down the pace of the game.

You had concerns around move 9-10 over doubled pawns in front of your king and the bishop-knight exchange in front of the white king position and the resulting open f-file.White could recapture with the f-pawn(which he did) or the h-pawn,furthermore,white would also have the bishop pair.My guess is that 99% of the players on chess.com could not accurately estimate the true value of the either resulting position:I don't have an idea either.I don't try to calculate such things and at this stage,I don't think you should try either.Almost all of your games are going to be decided by one or two tactical clashes,and you do have the ability to calculate those,thats what should be consuming the majority of your thought process effort,instead of subtle postional factors where even NM's will debate how much of a pawns-worth  the position has changed.

On the other hand,I was impressed by how you were looking at files,pawn structure,looking for holes, and weak points.That is quite a step from what you were doing in your first two games.It's clear that you are getting alot out of this thread.

Late in the game,on move 17,Qxc3,this is a very interesting sequence.Taking with the Q is understandable,however, dxc puts you right back in the game:1)solves threat of white Qxd;2) dxc attacks Nd2(gains you a free move) AND prevents Bg7 which is an easier attack on your king than Bf8 and 4) moves the d pawn one file closer to the queen-side which increases its chance of actually queening;and 5) moves it adjacent to the b and a-files which still have friendly pawns and may be able to help the c- pawn at some point.I mention this because dxc solves alot of blacks problems and gives white problems,Qxc doesn't do any of this.With a little study of pawn majorities and promotion,perhaps a few hours study and 20 pages reading,you'll recoganize this oppertunity next time it occurs.On move 17 I thought white and black were about equal.

I thought you played the opening better than did white,by move 10 I think you were equal,perhaps better.However,CASTLE,early and OFTEN!This is something that a quick study of opening principles will convince you of...fail to castle at your own risk.Tactically,your errors are similar to previous ones,and perhaps theres the clue.I noticed you seem to take your opponents counter-actions into account when you are not attacking.However,once you decide to attack and actually start moving pieces you seem to cease paying any attention to,or even acknowledging your opponent.You seem to be so involved in what you are going to do to your opponent that you turn your danger radar off.Furtheremore,while your moves 16-19 show you are thinking about the right things:looking for weaknesses,looking for tactics,creating ideas and seeing how the parts fit together,creating a plan;it's still not enough for an attack to succeed.Even if a pawn or piece had exsisted at g6 to block whites own attack,white could still block yours with a simple Qe2.The next step in  working on your thought process is calculating how your opponent can stop your tactics and what you have to do to stop him from blocking you.

All in all,a really good effort,you did alot of good things in this game.Keep up the good work!

BadgerSong, first I will comment on the chess. 

Your comment on 17... dxc3 vs. Qxc3 is very very interesting. In fact it's super interesting.  I saw it as a possibility in the game, and discarded it, thinking I needed to bring my Q down near the K to do a mate with the N, and if I dxc it would block my queen. It was a miscaculation, a misevaluation of the power of the pawn on c3, further attacking the knight, a misreading of the potential position. Your insight into that position at 17...is hugely instructive. 

Your comment of move 5...yes, I saw that I could trade Qs, but decided against it, again for very elementary and unsophisticated reasons. I thought if I trade Qs there, white could retake with the B, and I would have interrupted white's ability to castle. So I discarded the idea, based on it not doing enough, i.e. not preventing white from Castling. I just say I didn't understand the fact that trading Qs would slow the game down. I didn't know that as a 'fact'. 

What you write about the opening and my danger radar when I attack. YEs, and YEs. I felt I played the opening better than White, I felt I had an advantage, that White was responding to what I was doing, that I was dictating the opening. This, unfortunately, provoked this feeling of confidence, and later, when I was surprised by Qxf5  and I 'went on the attack', all my danger radar became turned off, exactly as you note. I will have to work on being a more cautious attacker; not that my attacks will become cautious, but when I feel that I am on the attack I will have to do a btter job of anticipating possible counter moves my opponent has, and I will have to put my opponents plans on my radar screen too, as aronchuch so clearly stated earlier. 

One more thing. Your positive attitude and your tone helps a lot too. You are giving beautiful tone, and you are giving serious chess lessons too. 

Thank you. 

This is going back a bit, but to follow up on Jaglavak's opening repertoire suggestion of Queen's Pawn for White and Caro- Slav set-ups for Black, the games of GM Vladimir Burmakin may be of great assistance, as this is all he ever plays. The question of whether this is right for a developing player is still there, of course!

lol. Another runner up for best joke on the thread. Jaglavak has #1 and #2.  Yes, well said Jaglavak. Not mind reading, but board reading. An important correction. Looking at targets my opponent has, not trying to read my opponent's mind. Very important correction to the language, which corrects the description of the desired activity. 

And yes, scanning for targets like a sharpshooter, and realizing that my job is to find not just my targets but to read the terrain to see what targets my opponents may have in his sights -- (I highly recomment the great film Enemy At the Gates, about a duel between two snipers at the Battle Of Stalingrad...fantastic movie... lots of target consciousness, lots of scanning to see what targets the enemy sniper may have in his sights)  and looking for the weaknesses in his position-- will likely reduce some of the shock and awe (lol) I experience!

Absolutely. With an Elo of 2589, he's no slouch either. Just proves that so called 'easy equality for the other guy' openings are perhaps not quite so easy to solve OTB.. at least, not for strong grandmasters. ;)

yup. And your English was crystal clear. 

Tactics Analysis Board: Problem #0088730

example of tactics problem (problem rating 1100) that I got right just now, that I never would have found in a game, because it involves putting the knight on the rim to set the skewer.  I have to play games like they're tactics puzzles PLUS I have to remember that my opponent is also playing it like a tactics puzzle. 

Somebodysson wrote:

Tactics Analysis Board: Problem #0088730

example of tactics problem (problem rating 1100) that I got right just now, that I never would have found in a game, because it involves putting the knight on the rim to set the skewer.  I have to play games like they're tactics puzzles PLUS I have to remember that my opponent is also playing it like a tactics puzzle. 

_______________________________________

A perspective that you can check out for yourself. Almost all tactics are pins (that includes pinning and unpinning) and forks. Example: a skewer is a pin, a double attack with Q, R, B, N is a fork. Pins are not just against pieces or pawns. The pin can be against a square. Example: (Back Rank Mate)White R on c-file at c1, Black N at c6 no other pieces or pawns on c-file. Black has castled on the kingside with King on g8,Black pawns in front of him at f7,g7,h7. There are no Black pieces that he can use to interpose when and if Rc8+ becomes possible for White. The preceding description is intended to illustrate the fact that object behind the pinned N is THE DARK SQUARE c8. And, that is what I meant above that pin is against a square.

I will check it with board. Thanks Yaroslavl. 

aronchuck, I understood you completely. You express yourself very well. I also appreciate Jaglavak's precision with language. But I understood you. I know you didn't mean 'read his mind'.  We're going to have to allow for people making minor comments about other people's comments, without getting into extended fights as we did last week, last Friday. 

aronchuck, I appreciate your directing your above comment above to me, and not taking it up with Jaglavak. And, yes, I understand you, you express yourself very clearly and generously, and I appreicate all the work you put into your comments. 

Different people express themselves differently. Coming from a non-native English background with a lot of other languages around me, I can understand and am perfectly comfortable with a lot of ways of expression. My one bottom line is good-spiritedness. And there's a lot of that here.  

Somebodysson wrote:

Yaroslavl wrote:

Somebodysson wrote:

Tactics Analysis Board: Problem #0088730

example of tactics problem (problem rating 1100) that I got right just now, that I never would have found in a game, because it involves putting the knight on the rim to set the skewer.  I have to play games like they're tactics puzzles PLUS I have to remember that my opponent is also playing it like a tactics puzzle. 

_______________________________________

A perspective that you can check out for yourself. Almost all tactics are pins (that includes pinning and unpinning) and forks. Example: a skewer is a pin, a double attack with Q, R, B, N is a fork. Pins are not just against pieces or pawns. The pin can be against a square. Example: (Back Rank Mate)White R on c-file at c1, Black N at c6 no other pieces or pawns on c-file. Black has castled on the kingside with King on g8,Black pawns in front of him at f7,g7,h7. There are no Black pieces that he can use to interpose when and if Rc8+ becomes possible for White. The preceding description is intended to illustrate the fact that object behind the pinned N is THE DARK SQUARE c8. And, that is what I meant above that pin is against a square.

I will check it with board. Thanks Yaroslavl. 

________________________

To the Back Rank Mate position I described, please change the Black N's position to the square c5.