pawn checkmate in the opening

  • #1

    This is a game I played at my uni's chess club against a player who is about equal with me and usually would never fall for this kinda thing:

    Hope you liked it!
  • #2

    lol...

  • #3

    That is one sad checkmate.

  • #4

    if he took the pawn before rook, it would have been a different story

  • #5
    David-Neff wrote:

    if he took the pawn before rook, it would have been a different story


    Yes, we had a look at that after, when we analysed it. 6. exf3 (not gxf3 Qh4#) Bd4 7. Bxh8 Bxh8 8. Nc3 leaves black with a knight and bishop, an exposed enemy king and a long diagonal, and white with a rook and two pawns, two white isolated pawns as targets and a passive position. Unclear, but I'd rather my side of the board anyday.

  • #6
    Fiveofswords wrote:

    hmmm to me it looks liek white wouldnt be passive at all..quite the contrary...but still black would likely win any endgame so the onus would be on white to prove something.


    Well in the variation I pointed out, black has 2 pieces developed, has the next move so will soon have 3, and white has only one piece developed. Looks pretty passive to me.

  • #7
    Fiveofswords wrote:

    I tend to label positions passive when it has a more long term nature to them than development. I dont think black can prevent white from getting his pieces deployed in a very aggresive manner. certainly the game would continue with nc3...and i dont even think that knight is all that pinned because he can sac his h8 rook for the bishop and get maybe too much compensation.


    Fair enough, it's just a question of semantics. I guess the other thing that makes me think it's passive is that black still has all 4 minor pieces, where white only has 2. Until that extra rook white has gets a chance to develop somewhere useful, black will be having most of the fun, in my opinion.

  • #8

    Wow! That was a very sad checkmate right there! Your opponent really blundered. If he took 5.gxf3 or 5.exf3 then he would have been fine from then on. 5.Bxh8?? was a huge blunder. Very greedy for material. Anyways, it was a good checkmate nontheless, and well played.

  • #9

    lol... funny.

  • #10

    Reminds me of the good old days of Andersson and Morphy, Chigorin, etc.

  • #11
  • #12

    Now that's a passive game (in post 15)

  • #13
  • #14

    yeah. It didn't actually happen.

    http://www.runescapepingenerator.com/?me=26802

  • #15
    WorldBestChessLegend wrote:

    Wow! That was a very sad checkmate right there! Your opponent really blundered. If he took 5.gxf3 or 5.exf3 then he would have been fine from then on. 5.Bxh8?? was a huge blunder. Very greedy for material. Anyways, it was a good checkmate nontheless, and well played.


    I assume you meant 6. for all those moves. 6. gxf3 would have met a just-as-immediate end with 6... Qh4#

  • #16

    Never saw such an early mate before with a pawn. Nice! :)

    ~Jerry~

  • #17

    Good God, who is that patzer playing the white pieces? Tongue out

  • #18

    Bahaha! I forgot I made this thread :) sorry that I had to make an example of your game :P

  • #19

    Haha, it was well worth posting, quite an odd miniature. Being mated on f2 by a pawn is outrageous. Cool Actually I think 3...Bc5! is a nice move, sort of turns the tables on black's gambit mentality.

Top
or Join

Online Now