<< Aggression + 'risk' = only way to win with black!

Sort:
tarius78

Hello all - I am very happy with this recent online game victory of mine, as again it was with the black pieces. In this case, at the start of our match, my opponent was a good 200-250 points higher than myself, so the double sacrifice I make towards the end of the mid-game was all the more of a 'nail-bitter' for me!

Again, following some other recent posts I've put up with winning with black pieces, this game demonstrated for me the value of highly aggressive play with black and not being afraid of gambits and sacs to accomplish tactical combinations.

I would certainly appreciate analysis to thighten up the loose screws on the play in this game, but I have only recently begun to expand my reperatoire with black pieces, and have been getting more results with Nimzovitchian systems, and/or hypermodern approaches to playing black. Here, the highlights are the kingside flooding of knights, the double sac, and a game-deciding combination to precipitate and completly won endgame. A most satisfying conclusion to a very satisfying game.

Please enjoy and comment:

tarius78

Thanks padman - yes, it is very helpful to have a plan I find! lol I remember when I used to find that concept so hard, but nowadays the opening structure basically dictates the possible plans, we just have to choose and resiliently try to actualize it.

Opening up the f file was a HUGE part of my strategy and in this game, thankfully, the f5 push was well timed and almost assisted by my opponent.

The second knight thing - yes I know... I still don't know how I feel about it. I imean on one hand - there's no arguing with results, but then again, was I most efficient? That always remains the question to consider when trying to better myself. I thought I bought myself crucial time for the rook's assistance - was there a better alternative that you had in mind, because I haven't looked at it too much yet...?

tarius78

Yes, it seems that I missed c4! which indeed does decide things. But That wasn't the intention of the last inquiry. We were talking about earlier in the game when the Knights were involved and I made the sac... Wether or not giving up the second knight was sound or not is the current question.

c4 - seems to win the queen, but otherwise does not accelerate a checkmate. I guess I was trying to finish my opponent off asap. In my zeal, I missed that opportunity and was more focussed on trying to achieve a midgame mate.

tarius78

Thanks man - I will have to go over those points though, because it is not enough to win, but I must learn and arm myself with more insight for future battles. So it's quite appreciated!

SJM1

what would you have done about 17 exf5 (en passant)

tarius78

SJM1 - I would have played: 17. ... Nxf6  naturally!

BTW - if I'm not mistaken, the proper notation for the move you described was actually : 17. exf6  which indicates by the notation and the position that it was a en passant capture. I think you're suppose to write the square that YOUR pawn goes to when it captures.

dunce

Very instructive. Thanks.