Being A More Threatening Person

Absolutely brilliant way of playing against the Scandinavian! You didn't give Black a chance to breathe and forced his king out into the opening.

You won't find 1.e4 d5 2.Bd3 in the chess.com database, but I did find 74 games with this move order with ChessBase.

First there's the foundation: knowing how the attack is done. Attacks are carried out through tactics (at least at some point; but you need to know when/how to prepare for "the big moves" like sacrifices, etc), so you need to of course look at as many puzzles as you can, try to understand why each combination works, etc. It's also quite helpful to go over the attacking games of strong players from the past and present to see how they do it.

Once you have this strong foundation you need to have the right mindset. Look for the most subtle flaws in your opponents moves, always try to forsee tactics present in the position, and the possible tactics that could come in the next few moves (if you have lots of patterns in your head, this often isn't so hard. A very basic example: you see the queen on d8 and your opponent is not yet castled. You have more space with a pawn on e4 (black w/h a pawn on d6), and you have rooks connected. To worry black you can put a rook on d1 and the strong threats of e5 (taking advantage of the pin) may push him on the defensive even further. Then if you have enough time you look at tactical threats on the central king before he has time to castle. Even if sees all the threats, you have a big initiative by creating them, and if he blunders you likely have the game won right away.). If you see a loose king, any sign of looseness really, an alarm should go off in your head to look for something. You often need to find the tactics to take advantage of it.

If you make a habit of looking for the most forcing tactical moves with the foundation, your moves will become more venomous and inject fear into your opponent with each one of your moves. Of course you shouldn't be afraid to sacrifice material if you will get a strong initiative in return, but at the same time don't always look for "good sacrifices" as they aren't always there. With experience you will get a better idea of when to go for things and when not to (in that case you just slowly improve your position), but always look out for ways to do so because dynamic factors are the most often overlooked by most people, and are also the least forgiving if the opponent takes advantage, compared to just a small positional mistake.

Generically, I'm finding that choosing gambit-based openings strongly encourage aggressive play.  If I'm going to give up a pawn in the Kings Gambit for initiative and development, then I better use it to attack!

i find all the gambit suggestions hilarious in light of musicamole's other post of "how do i stopp hanging pieces".  i'm not saying they are wrong, but it amuses me. 

A big thanks to paul 211 and Elubas!

So many good words to digest! I have the next four days off to catch up on my reading.

 "My question is again what do you do, look at and think when facing an OPP    move? This is the process that you and I must work on to fix." - paul211

Until today, I have not given my blitz opponents enough respect with the moves that they make, especially early queen outtings and excessive pawn pushes in the opening, with no regard for development.

I am finally realizing that this has been a gross error on my part. By not paying close enough attention to every move, I am missing so much, i.e., weaknesses/target squares, tactics and most important, the level of threat associated with each and every move.

Today's Blitz Games

A few players blew me right out of the water, even with my best efforts to pay attention to each of their moves. What they did best was create two many problems for me to solve, i.e., multiple threats. 

Two games where I won

By paying more attention, I was able to see better squares for my pieces and find a few tactics that worked. With the Black pieces, I gave the Nimzo-Indian a test spin, but good grief, I could not castle in four moves and keep my pawn cover intact at the same time! 

"I am finally realizing that this has been a gross error on my part. By not paying close enough attention to every move, I am missing so much, i.e., weaknesses/target squares, tactics and most important, the level of threat associated with each and every move."

Exactly! If you can see all of that stuff and play moves with regard to these features, each move you make will be useful, or better yet, scary.

It does sound like a contradiction, doesn't it?

I did start this thread, so it's my fault.  

I guess I want it all, to be both the solid player who doesn't hang pieces AND the guy who plays aggressive, attacking chess.

Well, not hanging pieces goes hand in hand with attacking chess, since both are based on tactics. Attacking chess is not exactly hanging pieces, it's choosing when to hang them.

mr. mole,

that first game you played was really good.  nice fork with the king and bishop, especially in the midst of all the chaos. 

in the second game you played well, too.  you may have been in trouble if the rook took your knight on 22. though.  but it seemed like you had a better handle on the game. 

elubas - i went with a short version hoping no one would notice that a gambit is not the same as hanging.  however, the result is a bit simliar for being down a piece.  i wonder if one of the differences is the psycological effect that when you blunder a way a piece you feel the need to regain it.  while in a gambit you know you will be down a piece and have a plan for doing it. 

Blitz Chess is so much more fun when I play with my eyes open and spend a few seconds per move.

As NM tonydal and others have said, in their tireless effort to help my game, playing tons of games does matter. I knew what to do with White's advancing h-pawn in this game. It only took 500 games to figure this out, so I look forward to sharing what I learn about chess after the next 500 games.

The story of White's advancing h-pawn.  Paul (211), this is what I was thinking at the time. 

Time Control - 10 Minute Blitz

White plays 8.h4. In the past, especially with White's knight on f3, I would play 8...h6.  However, this time I took a few seconds to think, assessed the threat of h4,  looked for counterplay and found a better move, 8...Rd8+, improving my rook to an open file.

After 10.h5, I took a few seconds to think, assessed the threat of h6, h7, and finally hxg6, and then chose not to play 10...h6, weakening my kingside, but 10...e5, liberating a diagonal for my light squared bishop.

After 13.h6, I took a few seconds to think, assessed the immediate threat of 14.hxg6, and not seeing a mating threat, but seeing the advantage of having White provide a pawn cover with hxg6, I played 13...Nd5, a thematic move in the Nimzo, attacking White's damaged pawn structure, in particular, one of the doubled pawns at c3.

So, I figure, White has spent 3 tempi advancing his h-pawn, while I am attacking White's king that is stuck in the center. I got three free moves on the chessboard!

15.hxg7 Nxe4 16.Bh6. Exchange of pawns. Black's king still has a complete pawn cover, with one of them being a pawn which White can not attack!  Also, White's bishop, while defending his pawn at g7, is blocking the h-file, rendering White's rook powerless to blow the cover off of Black's pawn cover.

Last, planeden has the better eye for calculation. It's still a weakness for me. White could have done much better by playing 22.RxNd1 Re8+ 23.Kf1, and had a winning endgame. I miscalculated ( blundered  , hung a piece...arg!! )  with 21.Rd1+?? . 

However, it could have been a great miniature game with 15...Rd1# or 15...Nf3#.

One can never get enough puzzle practice! 

"Blitz Chess is so much more fun when I play with my eyes open and spend a few seconds per move."

Yes, me too. Before I used to make the mistake of going into my own "blitz mode" specifically for blitz, where I don't consider anything deeply and just play some normal move, not even really thinking really, just playing the first attractive move. But now I play as I would in a long game, considering the plans and everything, just much faster and with less daydreaming. Surprisingly, these two methods couldn't be any more different, and the latter any better!

It's a real blast when you give yourself permission to think during a blitz game.

It is

That's the big secret to blitz! Actually think after all!

Bullet though I still don't know the secret to. In a 1 0 game a 5 second think could cost you the game.

I know a strong player who is also an avid Bullet player. It's amazing to watch him play, and one of the secrets is this huge database of chess patterns stored in one's brain, along with many, many years of playing the game.

I see it like I see jazz music. There's the ballad (slow chess), swing jazz (blitz), and bebop (blitz). All three can be executed with great artistry. So, I see these three forms of chess, slow, blitz and bullet as valid tests of mastery.

I love bullet chess, probably too much.  It's helped me be a much more aggressive player, since I've found that initiative is worth a lot more than in slower time controls.  If you're pushing your opponent around the board making them react to your moves, and you can predict their responses reasonably well, you'll have a "mental space" advantage that usually translates into a healthy time or material advantage.

For me the downside is that it reinforces my bad habit of moving too quickly.

Attack Attack Attack!

13... Ng3+ hxg3 14. Qh5. Same on move 14, 15 and 16! Also, why didn't you just take his queen 17.Bxd6?

Because post-match assessments almost always reveal more than is observed/considered during "tunnel vision syndrome" game play.

Yes... that would have been a far stronger move at the time. or
       17 ... Qxd6  then 18 ...QH6#

As for "13... Ng3+ hxg3 14. Qh5. Same on move 14, 15 and 16! "
Yes, I was defending instead of attacking when I chose to save the rook, it was an unnecessary defensive response.

Thanks for your observations!

Guys like you scare me.