My first win with the RETI/ZUKERTORT opening!

Hello all! I'm pleased to present my first win using the RETI opening, or as it has more recently been called, the Zukertort (whatever, just use Game Explorer and go with that!)

Anyways, in this turn-based game, my opponent was originally about 200 points over me, so I was on a vigil to play a tight and aggressive game, and had the luxury of using the white pieces.

I felt that crazy sacs and the like were not going to work here, so I needed something new and fresh, well, at least for me! So on a whim, I decided to experiment with this opening, with surprising results as the game ends in checkmate after a mere 27 moves! (Though, frankly, the game was over at least 5 moves earlier!).

Please have a look and if you have some insightful analysis, it is most welcomed as I'm trying to expand my opening reperatoire.

Thanks!

Why were you trying to castle queenside and why didn't you play c4, to take advantage of black blocking his c pawn in a queen pawn opening? In my opinion, your kingside attack was completely unjustified. If you wanted to attack on the kingside, why did you open with 1 Nf3? Black should have been playing for ...e5 (since you were completely commited to a flank and you had little control of e5 and the attack couldn't have worked. Perhaps 9...Qd6 first to control e5.

Well, Elubas, my idea was as follows:

Should black fail to attend to his kingside defence (which in my opinion is exactly what 3. ...e6?!  translates to), then I want to use my h1 rook (as stated in the commentary of the game if you noticed) along with at least one minor piece, to support a pawn push on the h file, and perhaps even the g file. This has worked well for me recently, in a few games (one such game is in progress now - it's 13 moves in, and I'm about to WIN! - I believe results speak for themselves.) In addition to this, my hope was to get my queen on the h or g file at some point, whichever gets opened up, and hopefully pull off a checkmate, though I had expected to use my knight differently.

Now, addressing your question even more directly - why did I play 1 Nf3?

Well, as stated in the intro, I was trying something new, I have read and heard that the Reti is a nice and flexible opening, and I was under the impression that flexible meant that I had the liberty of attacking any side I should so desire, and castle any side that suits me as well, potentially. No?

Anyways, that was my thinking to answer your question.

1 Nf3 has way less chances of attack than 1 e4, for example, because it doesn't control the center as much and doesn't open so many lines for the pieces, so it's artificial to try to attack on the kingside with a knight on f3 and trying to make a pawn storm.Pawn storms only make sense when you have control of the center or it's too difficult for your opponent to counter in the center, and more development helps. And in fact, once you had a knight on e5 your attack was probably correct, but black allowed you to form an outpost on e5 and didn't fight at all to remove it. But with correct play, you would never be able to play Ne5 or at least not maintain it. However, black could have played ...bd6 (instead of ...bb4) and just prepared for ...e5 and since you were focusing on a pawn storm it would have worked and then black's pieces are centralized while yours aren't and once black kicks your pieces away from the kingside black will be the one with the initiative.

So no, that's not what flexible means in chess. It means you can choose many different setups, but those setups always have some kind of grip on the center, whether it's direct or indirect and in that position you ignored the center when play was very possible there.

Elubas - I did want to also ask, separately, about c4...?

When was it that I should have played it? See, as I mentioned, I'm new to this opening, so I'm not sure what the common themes of it are, or how the timing should play out.

Also, what you were saying about e5 I guess is exactly the same as what I was saying about playing 3. ... e6?!  So you agree then...? That was a big mistake on black's part, right?

If so, since black made a big mistake according to you, then please explain how my kingside attack was "... completely unjustified..." because I'm just not seeing it.

You are much more highly rated, so I'm sure you're right, I just can't see the logic of what you're saying, perhaps because I'm unfamiliar with typical lines of play pertaining to this opening...

When you transposed into the queen pawn opening, you should have played c4 right away, especially since black blocked his c pawn. c4 is good because it pressures d5 (in fact it threatens cxd5 followed by e4) and after black plays ...e6 to hold it if you can force through e4 black is forced to give up his center. That position would be better for attacking, although probably not with a pawn storm, just a piece attack since castling on the queenside is risky when c4 is played and the pawn advances wouldn't really be helpful with the center open.

No, because black couldn't play ...e5 yet. ...e6 is not bad because although the bishop is blocked, it can be opened after an eventual ...e5. However, black would have been able to play ...e5 in this game because you were playing moves on the flank, which didn't control those squares. His mistake was not playing the plan of ...e5 in counter to your plan, and also allowing your knight outpost on e5.

The simple answer is that a flank attack is ineffective if your opponent can gain space in the center. Did you notice that once your opponent played ...Ne7 and you played Ne5 your attack seemed quite strong? The knight ate up squares on the board, helped the kingside attack, and prevented central counterplay. However if black could achieve ...e5 and you play dxe5 Nxe5, suddenly black's knight is right in the center while your pieces are only influencing the kingside but they're much less coordinated. Your advanced kingside pawns are instead weak, and it's black who has the kingside chances. If you think your attack was justified, couldn't black also try to do a kingside pawn storm? He had a very similar position. Maybe a visual would help so you can see what it looks like? black could have tried something like 9...Qd6, 10...b4 (to displace the knight from controlling d5), 11...Bb7 (so that after ...e5 dxe5 Nxe5 d5 is defended) and possibly ...Re8 or just ...e5 right away. If the knight was away from c3 then black could also occupy e4 with the knight which controls the board, unlike the kingside pawns.

great game!