youe idea's?

Sort:
Avatar of Gert-Jan

I have played a 15 min game and want to hear your comments about it.

Avatar of DavidMertz1

On move 11, White could have still played c5, driving back your bishop and maybe making it harder for you to play e5.

On move 15, are you sure the pawn can't be saved?  How about 15...Bxd2 Qxd2 Bf5, and you can't take the knight because it would expose your queen to his rook.

I don't think your move 22 deserves an exclamation point.  It's not bad, but all that happens is a bishop/knight trade.

On move 28, you're better off letting him fork you than losing a piece, I think.  I'd rather be down rook for knight than knight for nothing.  You should have at least considered it.

I would not have initiated a rook exchange on move 30.  You're giving him the open file to use with his other rook.  Plus you're behind, so you don't exactly want to be trading material for no reason.

On move 35 you say "a6 is a better move because it connects pawns."  Actually, a5 is better.  You have connected passed pawns - you want to push those as much as possible.

Personally, I would not have resigned at the end... Your king could have got back, and a rook pawn with a knight, while a theoretical win, is not the easiest thing to promote.  I'd make him prove he knows how.

Avatar of Gert-Jan
DavidMertz1 wrote:

On move 11, White could have still played c5, driving back your bishop and maybe making it harder for you to play e5.

On move 15, are you sure the pawn can't be saved?  How about 15...Bxd2 Qxd2 Bf5, and you can't take the knight because it would expose your queen to his rook.

I don't think your move 22 deserves an exclamation point.  It's not bad, but all that happens is a bishop/knight trade.

On move 28, you're better off letting him fork you than losing a piece, I think.  I'd rather be down rook for knight than knight for nothing.  You should have at least considered it.


I would not have initiated a rook exchange on move 30.  You're giving him the open file to use with his other rook.  Plus you're behind, so you don't exactly want to be trading material for no reason.

 

On move 35 you say "a6 is a better move because it connects pawns."  Actually, a5 is better.  You have connected passed pawns - you want to push those as much as possible.

Personally, I would not have resigned at the end... Your king could have got back, and a rook pawn with a knight, while a theoretical win, is not the easiest thing to promote.  I'd make him prove he knows how.


 Thanks for your comments. I agree with all of them. Especcially the comment about preventing the rook fork by losing a piece is interesting.

Avatar of Shakaali

49... Bxf5?? unnecessarily gives up the bishop for the pawn. Black's king is close enough to handle that pawn. 49... a3! 50. f6 Ke6 51. f7 Ke7 should win as the a-pawn is unstobable.

51... Ke6 (as well as some other moves) keeps the draw because of the plan outlined below. Black first plays a2 so that white's knight will be forced to take care of that pawn. If white takes his king to queenside in order to free the knight you have time to eliminate the h-pawn. If white advances the h-pawn with the support of the king you just keep your own king in front of the pawn. Best white can do pushing the pawn is position as follows: white ph7, Kg6, Nc2 black Kh8, pa2 with black to move it's draw because of 1... a1Q 2. Nxa1 stalemate and with white to move his knight cannot get to f7 in time either.

The final position is trivial win so I think your resignation was timely unless opponent extremely low on time (and even in that case the gentleman thing to do would be to resign imo as this was not blitz).

Avatar of piebus
Gert-Jan wrote:

I have played a 15 min game and want to hear your comments about it.


ik vond zwart erg zwak spelen.

Avatar of Gert-Jan
piebus wrote:
Gert-Jan wrote:

I have played a 15 min game and want to hear your comments about it.


ik vond zwart erg zwak spelen.


 bedankt, ik (zwart) speel bijna nooit live chess long games dus in dat perspectief vond ik het mee vallen.