I was White. My opponent was rated 1250.
Maybe this should go in the analysis forum after all. Originally I just wanted to vent, but now I want to analyze. I think my correct strategy was to develop fast, get my king safe, and survive the tactical chaos with as much material as possible. Does anyone else think my strategy should have been different? I now know that placing pieces other than rooks on open files is bad.
Move 29. Nxc7: The post computer originally though Rg4+ then Nxc7 was best by a fraction of a pawn, then decided it liked my Nxc7 better by a fraction of a pawn. Both result in all 3 pawns dead, but the difference is whether the rooks remain. Computers know how to use material, whereas humans like to simplify, which I did.
I feel your pain. When you analyze your games with an engine, prepare to be humbled. :)
Never mind the computer. I just noticed a few moves later that I failed to punish my opponents blunder, in day move chess!
Well, on further analysis of this game, I found that had I gone for the "blunder" while it was ripe, my opponent could have kept equality with accurate play. I did not blunder during the game, but rather blundered in my mind by thinking my opponent and I blundered. That is assuming if course there is not some other unnoticed tactic there.
Or, just how good the computer is.
I just finished a day move chess game. It became very complex with many enemy pieces woven in with mine, maneuvering, forking, pinning, overloading, removing the guard, each move having 4 obvious candidate moves per move for both sides, going 7 full moves deep. I calculated as best I could on paper, writing out trees and using minimax, but I still failed to see the moves my opponent played or those the computer said I or my opponent should have played. Normally I don't blunder in day move chess, but this game I made 3 blunders and a mistake during the blood bath. My opponent had 3 mistakes and 2 inaccuracies, only 3 of which I knew about.
I thought I pulled off some fantastic tactics at the end, sacrificing my rook to walk my pawn. The computer was not impressed, and found a rebuttal. I won only because my opponent did not catch my blunders. That still was the most intense game I ever played. Some of the computer analysis was over my head on first inspection, but the moves I understand are impressive. Plenty of x-ray tactics I can learn from. I knew computers are better than humans tactically, but I did not know it would see this much. It can count the points well.
I'm posting to vent and share, not to get help, though feel free to comment if you want.