A nice sicilian game: punishing mistakes
Sort:
Along with minor other mistakes, your trap is unsound. If White had played 30.b3, you would have lost a piece (...Bf1 Kg2) instead of won one.
This reminds me why I don't like the "game showcase" forum...
Irontiger wrote:
Along with minor other mistakes, your trap is unsound. If White had played 30.b3, you would have lost a piece (...Bf1 Kg2) instead of won one.
This reminds me why I don't like the "game showcase" forum...
... if b3 i would have exchanged saced my rook for his knight and got at least a pawn compensation and i would like to see your so called mistakes because i certaintley don't see any and if you don't like the game showcase forum don't view it then idiot
Irontiger wrote:
i don't get it my bishop and king could form a blockade??
blasterdragon wrote:
Irontiger wrote:
i don't get it my bishop and king could form a blockade??
One of your bishops is paralysed by the pawn during the time you need to bring the king ; meanwhile, the white pieces take care of the a and b pawn. After what, Black is just down an exchange.
Irontiger wrote:
blasterdragon wrote:
Irontiger wrote:
i don't get it my bishop and king could form a blockade??
One of your bishops is paralysed by the pawn during the time you need to bring the king ; meanwhile, the white pieces take care of the a and b pawn. After what, Black is just down an exchange.
i don't see your point??
Your line 34.Kg1 is a loss of time. White must aggress the pawns as soon as possible, and Black push them while keeping them safe before the white king comes. For example :
Oran_perrett wrote:
agreeing with irontiger's analysis, your trap was unsound since the refusion isn't equality or an edge for you it's dead lost. bishop vs rook endgame is pretty impossible to draw with pawns on the board, the rook is too strong.
you should really look at my anaylsis...
Oran_perrett wrote:
also maybe you should be a little less rude when people are trying to give you advice?
Well, I wasn't really kind-hearted either, so I understand his answer. My excuse is that posting in "game showcase" when actually the crucial point is not so brilliant as it seems (but maybe play could be improved from my analysis), with good faith, is the proof that posting in "game analysis" first should be done. And then why post it in "game showcase" if it is already posted...