Fooling a 2217 Rated Player Into Surrendering

I tricked a player of GM-strength into surrendering after just 21 moves. He "thought" he was lost, so he was indeed lost!

I can almost guarentee this person is not gm level. since internet ratings are generally higher than real ratings, and because of the fact that gm rating is 2500.  You showed some great play though. Thanks for sharing.

Some post mortem analysis. Yes, 2217 is probably IM-level and not GM level.

It turns out that Black will enjoy a nice attack regardless of whatever White does. However, whether this leads to a forced win is unclear.

on ccube, there's at least few in the 2400s on that site i know for sure and one in the 2500's, 2 gms at over 2500 i can think of.  easiest to gain the higher ratings on the quickest controls of course.  I would think 2250 on cc on corresponds with about 2000 uscf, although i know a uscf 1750 who has hit that standard, and i have been over 2400 on that site myself. i know a uscf 1950 who once went over 2800 icc for instance. very quick and very solid.  to compare ratings though, it's not so possible, when the quality of play changes much between time controls. playing blitz on chesscube for instance, my rating drops all the way to 2100.  online ratings don't matter to me, only so much that its cool to play the random im or gm u've (i've) never heard of. sometimes the titled guys are really low bc they're slow or fooling around or something.

btw, d4 and f5 were well timed, well done on that.

It's a good win, against an opponent with a higher online rating than yours, you can celebrate that...but you are in fantasy-land if you think your opponent is some kind of titled player. That's just not strong chess he played. If he's even class A OTB I'd be surprised. If he IS a master, then he was very drunk and playing with his Wii at the same time as this game. He played weak. And online ratings do not mean anything. I guess I'm an IM too. If only. 

By the way your post mortem analysis is flawed. White had an important resource with Qc4+ in the lines following the Rc1 escape plan.

In your post mortem line White should play 6.Qc4+ with a complicated game. But if he plays 6.e4 as you suggest, and you respond 6...Rad8? then 7.Qc4+ check would win a piece and the game.  

No the line you pointed out is a blunder. Qc4+ loses a piece, correct - for WHITE.

At first glance it looks like White is very clever - forking bishop and King. But then comes ...Rf7!! and suddenly both points manage to hold. To make matters worse it is now White that will get into a fork with b5 (to say nothing about Black's ongoing threats of dxe3 and Bxf3).

Let's see White's responses:

1) Bb3 (winning the pinned rook) - Bxf3! and White will get mated after he takes the rook. Even if he runs with Ke1, there is no escape after Qg1+, according to Fritz.

2) Ke2 b5 - White drops a piece

3) Bc6 (escaping the fork) - The isolani now exerts itself with dxe3! fxe3 (otherwise Qxf2#) Qxh3+ and White is busted, according to Fritz.

If Qc4+ after Rad8, then the same ingenius Rf7 defence applies. Black may not have the Bxf3 resource now, but d3!! keeps the game in Black's court.

Passed pawns must be pushed - isolanis especially, but Black's not actually trying to queen the d-pawn. The real trouble is Qh1#, with the d-pawn robbing the escape square e2. The White king is in real trouble, even if it runs to e1 Black has Qg1+ and Qxf2+ and this collapse of structure leads to checkmate in most of the lines I saw.

Whisperwalk.... i said Qc4+ (prior to e4) gave a complicated game... (ok, so  losing complicatedly as it turns out) ... I only claimed a piece win for White with Qc4+ after e4 and Rac8. Okay, that's not right either.

You refuted the wrong dubious line. So there.

Sorry I made a mistake in king placement at e1 - these things happen.

Quote: In your post mortem line White should play 6.Qc4+ with a complicated game. But if he plays 6.e4 as you suggest, and you respond 6...Rad8? then 7.Qc4+ check would win a piece and the game. You refuted the wrong dubious line. So there.

If you went through my post, you will see that I posted refutations for both lines containing Qc4+. It was just that I did not bother setting up a board for the first one.

Don't mention the war!

I see nothing brilliant about this game especially the opening.

You beat a 2200+ guy on the Internet! Yippee, now you're welcome to the club.

Is this or is this not the Game Showcase forum?

So give the guy a break!

this is a really great thread...thanks!!

Yes it was a good game you played. But clearly this player was no where near GM or even a master i doubt. Masters wouldn't play it defensively this badly for a start and they don't give up on amateurs easy either because we make plenty of mistakes along our way in trying to convert the advantages we have.

Actually masters do make mistakes. There is a pretty famous "Tryfon Gavriel" alias Kingscrusher (FIDE 2170) posting hundreds of his own games, which include mistakes, on the internet. And he is FIDE 2300+ on chesscube so I also cast aspersions on the "subtract 400 points" comment. You're exaggerating.

What masters are good at is in their positional knowledge and sound play, and having well-thought out openings that work to high accuracy. This does not make them gods. I did not say I played particularly well. But I did not play badly either.

This is not the first time I beat a 2200+ player - it is the second. Several months ago, I faced a 2203 because he tried some novel Bird's Opening (1. f4) against me, and I crushed him just by knowing the theory. (It's good to follow the youtube series, "The Polar Bear System"). I don't respect any master because any player can win only if they play good moves - if they blunder or monkey around with funny ideas then even juniors like me deserve to punish them.

I am going to study my theories hard from now on, so that maybe in one year's time, I can reach a higher level.

"FIDE 2300+ on chesscube" for a guy who is 2170 FIDE

"FIDE 2200+ on chesscube" for a guy of GM strength

 It was more directed at the comment directly before mine rather than any of the posts suggesting that his opponent was GM strength ... which is clearly crap.

Mine was actually intended as a small encouraging gesture :/