RolloOrollo's 3rd game commentary (21/3/2019)

Sort:
Avatar of sean893
Good day to All Chess Players!
This is sean893 here, and I got a request from my new friend RolloOrollo to analyze a game. I have checked out his link, and found the game indeed interesting. 
 
With RolloOrollo being in the field, he is no stranger to the very fast 3 min chess.
 
So without further adieu I'll hop right into this 3 min Blitz game!
 
 

 

Black made an interesting defensive opening, which is the Horwitz Defense. According to Chess.com, this first move by Black can be played against any White move for that matter. Black's second move however, gave me a new insight into a brand new variation. Although, I consider this move a bad move because the knight blocks the queen and bishop from developing!

 

White's Move 2: c4 also reminded me of a new insight for White. Sometimes, it is good to involve the pawns into the battle before bringing out the knight. It is very common to bring the knight out first, but that would mean the c2 pawn would be rendered passive and useless in the scenario where there won't be an extra pawn to fight for central square control.

 

Move 3: e4 is White's best move as well, to prepare the development of the queen and bishop! I am already familiar with this White opening. 

When Black played Move 6, I marked it as a bad move because the b8 knight is still not developed. Although this prepares to develop the queen, the knight could be useful as well. I may consider 6: c5, dxc5, Nc6, sacrificing a pawn for the development of the knight and queen!

 

Through moves 20 to 27 however, White did manage to keep all lines closed, as Black is forced to rethink over and over about moving the pieces round and round. I could tell that move 27: Rfe8 is a clear sign that Black had no idea what to do, and just move for the sake of not wasting too much time on the clock.

Black however, is in a serious positional disadvantage by Move 26. Did you all notice that White's pieces are far more active than Blacks? The material was equal, but the way these pieces were placed were totally not equal. Both of Black's bishops were permanently disabled by that move, and White is still free to manoever his knights around. Black's c6 bishop could do nothing, and if used as a sacrifice, can only do so by 27: Bxa4, which will be easily met with Nxa4, winning a bishop and threatening the b6 queen for capture. Also, the g7 bishop's only safe squares are h8 and g7, which going to f6 or Bxe5 will be met by Qxe5, which White's queen will point at h8 or g7 square afterwards, which White will then use the f4 knight to create and follow up a checkmate threat later on.

Throughout the entire midgame, Rollo has the advantage due to the fact that his pieces are more active than his opponent's. To any beginner, it can be clear who is winning, but however in a very fast Blitz game I am adamant that I would not realize this, and still look at the board by Move 26 as if everything's equal due to the extremely fast time pressure!

 

Also, I have included some moves in the Analysis which are mostly my moves as White or Black, so I will also show RolloOrollo on what would I do if I were in White or Black's side, from my own chess understanding.

 

Thank you RolloOrollo for requesting me to analyze your game, and your wish is granted! 

 

Avatar of RolloOrollo

Hey Sean, I'm glad to see you went through the game! Thanks for the analysis happy.png

I'd like to add a few points which I feel are critical to this game between moves 14 and 28. When black played 15... Nxe3, he was likely intending to gain an advantage with the bishop pair against the knight pair, not realizing that his opening moves hindered the activity of his bishops, making them, due to the position, weaker than the knights.

The key element that black missed is that his minor pieces remain inactive at this point. 9... Nbc6, 10... Nb4 and 11... Nxd3+ are 3 moves played by a knight destined to be exchanged, without thought to how black's own position is improving from this sequence of moves. After 16. Qxe3, black should have tried to take control of the a6-f1 diagonal, perhaps with a move like b6 opening up space for the bishop to land on a6. Over the next few moves, black moves his queen 3 times with no real plan instead, putting the bishop on d7 where it is blocked by its own pawns instead of a6 where it has a chance to be active.

Notice that white slowly gains a space advantage. I played 19. g3 to have a simple symmetry in the position and make it easier for myself to visualize knight maneuvers. The knights are more effective when you have a space advantage, and against a disabled bishop pair, I used my pawns to control the dark squares, and my knights to control the light squares. Notice how the move 27. Nfd3 prepares 28. f4 so the knight can maneuver to f6 deep into black's territory while black is unable to counter due to the blocked position. 33... Kg7 is black's final blunder, losing time once again and putting his pieces on the wrong squares. A better try would be Re7 preparing to defend the king with Rg7 and Be8, but it's already a bit too late at this point.

I felt this game is a good representation of how a passive approach to chess can be punished with correct ideas and plans, even when those ideas don't translate to 100% accurate moves (accuracy improves with practice!). Assessing the position and developing a plan are the only ways to play for a win. Playing a closed position and waiting for your opponent to blunder will only get you so far!

Avatar of sean893

Hi RolloOrollo,

Thank you for your comment. Your observation of Move 15 has opened up a new eye for me to see this chess game from a new angle.  I rewinded and replayed Black's Move 15: Nxe3, and your explaination rings true. The knight jumped himself to suicide taking a bishop with him, with all his forces on the back just watching by! 

I can now finally see that Black intends to sacrifice his knights for the bishops, thinking that bishops are far stronger than knights but for this position that is absolutely not the case. Also, although I won't have the mindset to play 3 moves using the same piece, the knight for example, I could see that it is a slightly bad move although it is not enough to constitute it as a blunder. 

 

I believe applying this theory in the case of Knights vs bishops in various positions, is something that I have not yet fully grasped yet as a 1.2k player. I need to learn more in terms of that sub-topic of chess. 

Though, a 3 min chess here won't help me as that would mean I would have no time to think and ask myself questions. I can achieve this, but by through a 15 | 10 rapid game or maybe even a 10 minute Blitz (though that's unlikely.)

 

 

 

Avatar of RolloOrollo

It will start to come to you more intuitively once you start focusing on piece imbalances in the middle game (something I believe is a big part of the main core of understanding the strategy of the middle game). Most lower rated players will rush to exchange pieces in the opening and middle game stages. They often are not thinking of the relative values of their pieces in relation to the position. Some key things to remember: Space and Closed positions favors knights, and open positions where your opponent has less space to maneuver his knights favors your bishops. In addition to capitalizing on your opponent's blunders, you should try to hone in on building a better position for your own pieces to attack and defend freely. When your opponent helps, it's always a plus!