In the picture below, you see me playing as white. My plan was as follows: my opponent played b5. I wanted to use this and sacrifice my bishop on a4, in order to fork the queen and king. As you can see my Rook on e1 pins the bishop to the king, thus making f5 a safe square.
I played Nh4 to set up my plan, hoping my opponent would take my bishop, so I could answer with Nf5+ forking the king and queen. I do understand that black could move the king or play g6, but then I would move my bishop.
Can someone explain to me why this is a mistake?
Black can avoid the fork by Kd7 or Kd8 or g6 and then you would be left with the bishop en prix and the out of position knight on h4.
I see from looking at your archive that your opponent ignored your threat and didn't even take your bishop, leaving you to play Nf5+, winning immediately.
It worked but if your opponent had been paying attention, your position wouldn't have been as good. (I noticed that the Game Review called it an inaccuracy, which is somewhat milder than a mistake.)
/ "Hope chess" - look up the blogs by Dan Heisman on it. https://www.chess.com/article/view/passive-vs-basic-hope-chess
In the picture below, you see me playing as white. My plan was as follows: my opponent played b5. I wanted to use this and sacrifice my bishop on a4, in order to fork the queen and king. As you can see my Rook on e1 pins the bishop to the king, thus making f5 a safe square.
I played Nh4 to set up my plan, hoping my opponent would take my bishop, so I could answer with Nf5+ forking the king and queen. I do understand that black could move the king or play g6, but then I would move my bishop.
Can someone explain to me why this is a mistake?