Chess - Play & Learn


FREE - In Google Play

FREE - in Win Phone Store


How well or badly did I play?

  • #1

    Here is an OTB game i played. The more I analyze this game, the more I realize, I am blind at tactics OTB. My head blocks out certain tactics and I am not noticing winning tactics or proper positional moves that will give me a superb position. If I had to guess on how I played....well I played...not too well. Can someone do an analysis?


  • #2

    Yeah, right now I don't feel like doing analysis so excuse me for being general, but it is true that there is a big distinction between knowing a lot about chess and knowing how to find good moves versus being able to do it in a tournament situation Smile. I know it can be scary sometimes since if you make one big mistake you might never recover, but I think you just have to put your head out there and calculate as confidently as you can, and if you make a mistake well that's life -- as long as you learn from it you will eliminate that mistake from your future games.

    So yeah, just wanting a draw in a better position, while understandable, probably isn't the best mentality because it makes life easier on your opponent -- sometimes you have to find some accurate moves to convert an advantage; you should be willing to at least try this. I'd say just have confidence in your own moves, within reason of course, and if that results in a mistake, it's the only way you can grow anyway. If you just insist on playing the safe move every time, you are giving your opponents a break they don't deserve.

    I was basically like that too, but I've started to get used to tournament play. I know that it's not just about what I know about chess; I also have to be able to execute my knowledge too.

  • #3
    HurricaneMichael1 wrote:

    I say also use an engine, it'll show you any tactics better than any human could ever hope for.

    Not necessarily...

  • #4

    A few positional thoughts (tactics I have no talent whatever for):

    Don't waste your time castling when your opponent has yet to develop a piece. Use that tempo to take control of the board (Nc3 and e4 suggest themselves).

    The knight on e5 was not really doing anything, and tied down a lot of material to protect it. On the other hand, 15. Ne4 would have been pretty powerful.

    All your pieces got crowded on the queenside, partly because the center pawns were not pushed until it was too late, at which point they only helped to block off your pieces from black's king.

    In short- take control of the centre!

  • #5
    HurricaneMichael1 wrote:

    I say also use an engine, it'll show you any tactics better than any human could ever hope for.

    BUT will it help the OP learn anything? Possibly, but he should do his own analysis first and then compare that to the engine's analysis. I know turn-based chess isn't for everyone, but I like it because I can analyze as I play and when the game's over I already have something to compare with the engine's analysis. 

  • #6

    Perhaps it would be a good idea to indicate whether you were white or black...

  • #7

    I analyzed it a bit, but I would like to see what other people have to say, I played this b3 line because i saw carlsen play it in a couple of his blitz games, one against morozevich and against someone else. 

    I dont blame the opening for my problems, but i must say, it could have been better.

    For example

    Instead of 6.a4 followed by b3 , my book a couple months ago pointed out that 6.d3! exd3 7.Ne5 dxe2? 8.Qxe2 gives white a relentless attack. 

    also 12.Nxc6 wins a squeaky clean pawn.

  • #8

    Please read the OP's post, he said he's analyzed it and reanalyzed it.HurricaneMichael1

    Maybe I have ADD (Attn Deficit Disorder)? I did read the OP's post before writing mine but somehow it didn't sink in, sorry about that!

  • #9

    No one with thoughts on the OP? I was white if anyone wondered.

  • #10

    Just clicking through the game... notice you missed 12.Nxc6

    15.axb5 feels wrong... you untangle his cramped queenside for him with exchanges?  Was looking at Ne4-d6 or Ne4 Ba3 someone to d6 or some combination of that.

    At first I didn't like 17.e4, but ok the bishop comes back into play on f1 (as in the game).  Still looking at Ba3 though.

    And as Elubas said about the endgame... you really shouldn't just give up on a position like that.  Ok I've been discouraged before and offered a draw or played worse, maybe we all have, but this isn't any way to play.  You think white is a bit better?  What about the position make you believe that?  What moves will prove it?  If that doesn't get you excited and ready to work then maybe bailing out was best.  As elubas said playing without trying to push your advantages is a great way to lose a game.

  • #11

    Thanks, I really like syrup on my waffles too (very tasty waffles).

    Anyone else have thoughts?

  • #12
    paulgottlieb wrote:

    There's a lot to be said for the old-fashioned 10.d4 followed by Bf4. I know it's 20th century thinking, but I still enjoy grabbing the center and getting ahead in development. Also 11.axb5 axb5 12.Rxa8 Bxa8 13.Na3 looks interesting. There are a lot of little tactical ideas on the queenside.

    Someone already mentioned 15.Ne4 I think, but it does look good. That d6 square is tempting. 18.Qxb5 is so tempting, but I don't think it's best. How about Ba3->d6. That looks like a better try. And at the point where you say "white has some advantage," I just don't see it. What advantage?

    Yeah i agree. As for the last question: before Bxc6, white has some "space advantage" in that endgame, since black's pieces are passive, but like i said, its probably just drawn.


Online Now