Winning Through Intimidation (The Power of the Threat)...

Howdy Chess Friends,

It's been said the "threat" is even more powerful than the move itself or something like that if we can paraphrase to get the idea across.

After playing a game where the power of the threat seemed to me to be especially "obvious" or clear to see,

(this is to say it happens twice in the same match and in a series of 3 consecutive moves to make it easy to see/understand/learn/absorb)

I thought it may be beneficial to share this one in the showcase for those who would like to focus on adding yet one more simple to learn, yet easy to use tactical tool to their arsenal of chess weapons.

For the intermediate and above, this will be nothing but another example of yet-to-be-experts making next to the last mistake.

But for the chess player rated under <1600 or so, I hope this helps reinforce your grasp on how to use the power of the threat to seize initiative, gain tempo, win material and take control of your games.

Enough prelude. Here's the goods -- so as always, Enjoy!

****** Important ****** Pay close attention to the moves 18-21 where the "threat is mightier than the move" strategy dominates the game for black.

*Please click "Flip" so you can see from the perspective of the player with the black pieces which is what I used in this one. It just makes absorbing the game easier for you...

5. ...Qxg2 is a winning move that you missed

Other than that it's a pretty blunderfull (haha so clever) game. Seriously though I don't quite understand what you mean about threats being stronger than moves.

For the Qxg2, you mean on move 5?

Yeah, +1 on the oh so clever. God forbid someone not "be aware" less than perfect chess was ever played by a mortal, right? 

We must make each player accutely aware of all the flaws they possess in case they begin to think their win was anything but utter vomit in the eyes of "their betters". Yeah, right. Please. LOL. If I wanted to take the time to analyse, you can be sure I would have and found anything to be found if it was to be found. But that wasn't the purpose of this quickie 3 minute blitz game.

That was the purpose for the pre-emptive disclaimer of "critics or analysts need not apply" in the original post lol or in other words, if I want some analysis, I"ll post in the analysis forum instead of the showcase... but all is well.

Now for the part that actually excites me!

And a hearty, "Thanks!" (I take the constructive criticism that I failed to get my point across about the threat being stronger than the moves and am more than happy to share because I was actually hoping someone was sincerely wanting to know more...)

And that's great, because it's a topic I enjoy and if I can somehow transfer it to another, then I'll feel the few minutes it took to create the thread and the vulnerability of sharing something personal wasn't in vain (or a sac with no comp lol).

Yeah, the ones with zero blunders, mistakes or inaccuracies, I keep to myself and only reserve for super-grandmaster eyes. You know who you are.  I certainly won't play that way on here for just any ole Joe to access, so don't worry. I'm not "giving away the farm" like I got accused of last time. 

Okay, on moves 18-21, If you see how after white takes the pawn and the queen responds by joining the rook on the file...

just the mere presence or "threat" of the queen was enough to win the bishop.

Note: There was no capture made but just the "threat" was enough to ward off any interference from capturing white's bishop there with the rook.

Then, once black takes with the rook in the center file, there is pressure or "threat" applied to white's queen which is enough to make her abandon the scene altogether, leaving white's knight "en prise".

So again, just the presence or "threat" of the piece being there, even without a capture, was enough to force away defenders and win the piece.

It may be surprising, but there are actually players who have yet to master this and by seeing a sequence of consecutive moves with this in action, it could help them raise their game to the next level or at least be mindful of the opportunity when they play.

And blunders or not, from experience, I know anything that helps me improve my game, I find to be truly wonderful.

I'm not sure if you meant that to come across as agressive as it did but anyway...

I understand what you mean by threats now you're essentially using the word 'threat' as a blanket term for various neat little tactics.

As a side not; your attitude towards me pointing out that 5. ... Qxg2 was a good move will never help you improve, because rather than remembering that pattern, you instead go on a huge rant about how you aren't a god-like machine.

Oh, and you never wrote "critics or analysts need not apply" so how was I to know that?

You're exactly right. Thanks for the help! Just what I was looking for. Appreciate it. 

Nice game. White made a series of very bad moves starting from move 18. Because of that he/she got strangled. White's opening was not aggressive enough either, and he/she didn't develop pieces quickly.