And when egine showed the mate in two I had mixed emotions. Exhilarated that yes the thrust of the game was the "correct" one, for the level of chess played anyway. And disappointed that all thta work did not culminate in the great expectacle that was coming. Actuall the 45 add on kept me alive and manage to inrease time.
what the #$%^was he playing and how did he win?
Sort:
Jan 17, 2014
0
#703
Still, that Nxg6+ was very tempting with that pin on h7 and the pin on the Rg7. IT would be easy to see those two pins and figure that Black was in a straightjacket without calculating it out. I guess you missed seeing the Q. I guess you may have claculated all those exchanges and that you'd be ahead in the endgame. All of that would contribute to the temptation to not look longer and find that killer mate.
Took me 1 min and 57 secs to make move 35 and just before the actual move had 14 seconds total left. When move was completed now had 59 secs.
Somebodysson wrote:
Please help me make sense of this game I played tonight at the chess club.I had a huge lead in development in the opening due to my opponent's weird opening system, but I felt that I didn't know what I was doing after my 7. e5. I was white.
He won because you only have 4 pawns and he has 7 pawns...
Jan 17, 2014
0
#706
Tower_of_Joseph wrote:
And when egine showed the mate in two I had mixed emotions. Exhilarated that yes the thrust of the game was the "correct" one, for the level of chess played anyway. And disappointed that all thta work did not culminate in the great expectacle that was coming. Actuall the 45 add on kept me alive and manage to inrease time.
yes! Exhilirated that yes the thrust of the game was the correct one!! And now you're going to practice tactics repetitions so that will never happen again and obviously you'll improve and become so much stronger. Nice.
A sharp tactitian, like a master, would have seen that in his sleep and yours truly should have seen if more up on his tactics. Thats why people like Dan Heisman stress doing repitious easy tactics like the one missed. That way even if brain dead because of time trouble memory in hand muscle will pick up the right piece and put it in the right square.
Jan 17, 2014
0
#708
ToJ: you and I wrote the same thing at the same time 
. You WILL do those repetitions. We know it, because of this game you posted.
@ ToJ
If you play enough of these type of games they will imprint on you. Playing out positions OTB with a clock ticking will imprint far better than studying positions in a book & if you miss it in the game it will still stick in your head from the post game analysis or showing others like us. Books & online puzzles are a very good foundation for tactics but there is NO substitute for actually doing it OTB under pressure. I bet if you see a similar position anytime in your future you will pounce on immediately.
From personal experience I find that knowing a puzzle is a puzzle changes the dynamics somewhat. eg, the Daily Puzzle often gives a clue in the title as to what to look for in the solution. Or just the fact that it is a puzzle tells me to look for certain things like forcing moves. Puzzles have to have that otherwise they don't work as puzzles. This is why when I coach (my family now or beginners in the past) I stressed the value of converting book study to actual games & its actually easier than it sounds.
I went through Reinfields book 1001 checkmates (or whatever its called) at least 3 times until I could do them all almost instantly. Then I got lucky & chose an opening that had a very tactical middle game for lots of sacrifice opportunities. Everyone should have such an opening in their repertoire just to keep themselves tactically sharp. I won't mention the word Stonewall again (Ooops) but I also used the Kings Gambit & I'm sure there are many other suitable candidates, just can't think of any at the moment. I also used the Grunfeld & the Sicilian for similar reasons.
@QueenTakesKnightOOPS yes i agree. One of my favorites is the Smith-Morra as white.
Jan 17, 2014
0
#711
QueenTakesKnightOOPS wrote:
@ ToJ
If you play enough of these type of games they will imprint on you. Playing out positions OTB with a clock ticking will imprint far better than studying positions in a book & if you miss it in the game it will still stick in your head from the post game analysis or showing others like us.
QTKO: by "playing out positions OTB with a clock ticking" I guess you mean playing games, right? You don't mean setting up tactics puzzles from a book onto a board, and set a clock ticking do you? Or do you?
This is why when I coach (my family now or beginners in the past) I stressed the value of converting book study to actual games & its actually easier than it sounds.
QTKO: how do you teach your family to convert that book study to actual games? Is there a pedagogical method you actually use to help them do that?
I realize I'm straying a bit from the analysis of games that we're doing by asking these questions. Sorry for the questions I asked ToJ, I was just puzzled by the 25 second but and how he understand his error. Thanks ToJ. And QTKO, I won't ask lots of pedagogical method questions, I was just intrigued by what you wrote. thanks.
btw, my tactics study is proceeding, I'm very glad about it. Its the most important thing. And I'm going to start writing out annotations longhand, to practice writing out chess. I think this annotations work we're doing on here is awesome. I'm really glad for it. We're going to work the three questions and the annotations until nobody wants to come here ever again, becuase they're so sick of the questions and the annotations
@ ToJ
Someone posted a Smith-Morra gambit a while back & it got a few of us very interested. If you have any good games using it I would love to analyse them.
@ Somebodysson
Learning requres some pressure to gain the maximum imprinting so an OTB game is far more effective than setting up a position. I'm all for using a board & book for study but that needs to be backed up by OTB play. I bet the 1st time you get a win with a good sacrifice it stays with you forever!! 
With my family they play against me with a prize of not washing the dishes that night or similar. I can usually lead them into a position to test what they are studying
As far as straying from analysis goes I think a little bit of that is ok, you need some variation or you will burn out focusing on 1 thing only. We use a little trick for that. When we want a break from serious study we download a video (Yasser Seirawan has become a favourite) We put it on a USB drive & run it on the TV. We don't look at it as study but just as fun ^ some of what we see imprints purely by osmosis. eg. Seirawin often plays strange stuff to beginners but I picked up on his use of Bishops as a long range piece. Sometimes in a French or Caro-Kann he will have a Bishop on the back rank undeveloped BUT... supporting a Knight deep in enemy territory. I have now started to see this OTB & use it, purely from watching a video with my wife & a beer in hand late at night.
I tend to take a different view from some Coaches, I like to look at how ppl are learning & throw in a little variation to keep them fresh.
As per suggested in previous post N sacrifice on d5 tried.
Aha! 2 games to analyse!
@ToJ
Thanks for the Smith-Morra. I usually tell absolute beginners to stay away from Gambits because they don't know how to convert the advantage & eventually lose on material but we are past that level here so it should be very instructional.
@ Somebodysson
Looks like an interesting game at 1st glance, I'll get to work on it. Look forward to your analysis too.
Jan 19, 2014
0
#718
@ToJ: from your annotation in note #813, can you say more about how Black is looking good after your note 12...Bxe5. Can you show a continuation that illustrates how I'm better, or a description of why black is so much better? I just can't see it, and if I can't see it even after your note, I certainly won't be able to produce it.
Also, @ToJ, let's try to keep to the activity of asking the three questions in the annotations. 1. what is opponent's idea 2. what are the weaknesses 3. what piece to improve.
thanks.
Jan 19, 2014
0
#719
I just had a hankering to play a live game, G30. I'm just posting it to show aronchuck and qtko that I'm not completely blind to tactics, and that I can set up a checkmate
. My opponent did what I often do; he just didn't see it coming, was too focussed on his plan and didn't ask 'what is my opponent's plan'. I won on my opponent's blunder, but that's a legitimate win. Also, before the final checkmate my opponent failed to see some earlier blunders of mine, and I failed to see some of his plans. Tartakower taught 'the one who blunders second to last wins'.
. My opponent did what I often do; he just didn't see it coming, was too focussed on his plan and didn't ask 'what is my opponent's plan'. I won on my opponent's blunder, but that's a legitimate win. Also, before the final checkmate my opponent failed to see some earlier blunders of mine, and I failed to see some of his plans. Tartakower taught 'the one who blunders second to last wins'.
I used engine. Tactically can be very blind. And a lot of times am playng by intuition, or experience or combinatio of both. For example in this opening and as black and with a similar attack from white I have been put away. But I have seen similar puzzles where you decoy piece on diagonal and queen or bishop behind knight are ready to go for the jugular with a discovered double check.