Computer Analysis Shows No Blunders or Mistakes

Your opponent is blundering every piece they have ..

i used to have ths illusion too. Even if the computer tells you that you played perfectly, it doesnt mean you played extraordinarily well, its just that your opponent blows. lol

OMG I HAD NO BLUNDERS OR MISTAKES OR INNACURACIES OMG WORSHIP ME OMG I"M SO GOOD SHOULD I WRITE A BOOK? LIKE OMG I HAVE BEEN WORKING ON My POSITIONAL PPLAY AND OMG LOOK AT THE RESULT LIKE OMG

Are you serious? I agree with ChessyPuns, if you play someone that makes a lot of mistakes it is going to be really easy to have a perfect game, you and your opponent never grab the center with pawns on the opening that is a chess principle and you said you are good with positional play? dont take this the wrong way,I dont want to kill the spirit or the good mood, its good that you enjoy the game and that you think you are good but try to play against someone that doesn't give a lot of material for free on the opening and knows how to develop his pieces, if your opponent is strong is going to be really hard not to blunder

There was no positional play. Your opponent hung a piece on move 9 and should have simply resigned at that point. Your next goal (since you sort of asked) should be to play much stronger opponents.

Perhaps you should read what I said instead of attempting to insult me. I said I'm getting better at positional play, not that I'm "good" at positional play. There is a huge difference.

You're quite a bit of a instigator, aren't you? This forum is called "Game Showcase" I never implied at one point that I was a "good" player, just that I played a game that the computer analyzed to be free of many mistakes.

I swear, I've never seen so many elitists on any other forums than this chess forum.

When my opponents blunder every move I play a perfect game too.

game showcase implies that your game is actually good, which it is not. You say you played to game well and that you are proud of winning a game like this. We point out that there is nothing to e proud of and that there is no point of posting a game where your opponent blunders away all of his pieces, and you call us jerks. if you want to get better, play higher rated people, not someone 60 points lower, and actually take some effort to analyze your games, you simply ran it through the chess.com analysis and posted it, low effort on your part, and you expect us to agree with you and congratulate you on (once again) playing a game where your opponent through away everything? Also, based on the reception on your last two posts on this topic, what did you expect???

there is no point in "improving your positional play" at this level, just try not to blunder pieces (https://www.chess.com/live/game/2501365487?username=jaylefler#)

or maybe learn some openings as well (https://www.chess.com/live/game/2497565084?username=jaylefler

https://www.chess.com/live/game/2499406549?username=jaylefler

https://www.chess.com/live/game/2497565084?username=jaylefler

https://www.chess.com/live/game/2487545325?username=jaylefler

sorry to come off as harsh, but there is much more room for improvement in other areas for you and maybe try to put in more effort in analyzing your games (not only victories!) and perhaps you'll play a masterpiece someday which you can actually post in the "showcase" forum and not have any negative feedback... until then keep working hard...

Games are relative to the level of person you play. I'm sure that a grandmaster might think a win of 1600 players isn't anything to brag about either.

I played someone at a similar level and the computer said that my game didn't have any mistakes. Yes, I was proud of that because in all the games I've played, I've only achieved that twice.

I never said that everyone should agree with me or congratulate me. Why even bother saying anything if you don't have anything nice to say? Common courtesy is lost in this world and it's disgusting.

I'm sure that grandmasters might not think games between 1700 level players are worthy of being showcased. Does that mean they shouldn't be proud of their efforts or display their games? Everything is relative to rating.

Anyway, I'll keep in mind all the posts and posters that don't think I'm good enough to post in a showcase forum. 

If you can't see the elitism in this thread, you are blind - sorry.

Big deal, I've lost some games. What are you trying to prove? I'm sure all of your games are perfectly played.

There are more urgent problems in your game that you must fix before you go off and master positional technique, a basic knowledge of the opening (f6, g5, bh6 isn't the best) and some more thought about "is my move safe?" should take priority over "how should i take advantage of his bad knight"

I think you made the right choice to keep in ming all the posts. Take the good with the bad. Maybe it wasn't a great game, and maybe you played someone having a bad day, but it was improvement and that's important no matter what level someone is. I have never posted a game because I am not good enough to do it, I've never had a game I thought was great. So whether you post another game or not, just enjoy the improvements you have made.

Re-read post #8.  

Your opponent dropped two pieces and then forced losing exchanges as much as possible in the remaining moves.  It would of been difficult to find mistakes with any reasonable candidate moves.

Though, good job in not blundering chances to black.  That is tactical not positional.

Not sure why all the hate, but good job man! Even if they played not optimal, you played better than previous you, and that is what matters, if you are improving! 

Everyone here is a jerk. Don't listen to these neckbeards.

Jay, you claimed, "Computer Analysis Shows No Blunders or Mistakes", which is not true. The computer said Black made a mistake, an inaccuracy, and a blunder.

It was not so much that you played well; it was that your opponent played so badly.

you bumped a three year old thread for this