The one with the most profile views wins a game analyses

Sort:
SebLeb0210
MrDamonSmith

With a6 he was attacking the base of my pawn chain. It's a good way of weakening not only the pawn attacked but also the one it protects. PAWN STRUCTURES. By getting rid of the b pawn it ties my two rooks down to the defence of the c pawn meaning they will be quite limited in the adventures they can go out on.

MrDamonSmith

Haha sebleb, WHITE WINS. Why'd you stop? It was an easy win well before he queened, I worked it all out. There's nothing black can do about the white kings incredible central position while his own is way out of play because it had to nurse a pawn to the queening square, it left his king so far away he couldn't stop the passed pawns of white. Whenever the rook leaves to go stop the winning passed h pawn then both his remaining pawns fall. Easy win for white but the opening & middle game were hard work. Of course half of the ending was coaxing black into getting his king way too far advanced & of course letting my rook get to a7 was bad for him.

Remember this SebLeb. Material isn't everything in chess. Sometimes it's only temporary by design. There are costs that aren't only pawns or pieces. Some costs in chess are time, space, initiative, pawn structures, piece activity, weak squares (connected to pawn structures), etc. When you look at a chess game don't just look at who has what in terms of material. If one of the players is down a pawn or more then see if there are other imbalances like did the player who's up a pawn get a huge hole in his position that allows his opponent to just cram any piece he wants right into the heart of his position. Maybe one side is down a bishop BUT in return he has an irresistable attack that's likely going to win. Maybe one player is down a pawn but his pieces have much more mobility (can simply move to many more squares than his opponent) & therefore are more valuable. EVERYTHING COSTS SOMETHING IN CHESS. A rook isn't always worth 5 points & knights & bishops aren't always worth 3 & pawns arent always worth 1. But Queens ARE always worth 9! just kidding on the last part about queens.

DrSpudnik

Why stop after Kxb1? It looks  like White can play h3/g4 and with the King on the wrong side of the board, the pawns can be ushered home by that centralized King.

MrDamonSmith

Yes. Of course white won. The black king was out of play & the lone rook can't cope with the avalanche of pawns. Notice the white king took up that dominating position in the late middlegame/early endgame. There was plenty of strategy put into working this ending out, that's why I thought it would be a good ending for SebLeb to analyse. The last 2 pawns of black fall as soon as the rook leaves to help stop the passed pawns. Easy win for white in the ending. Queening first doesn't equal a win. Here's the last part of the ending: http://www.chess.com/echess/game?id=82637426

SebLeb0210

Yeah maybe white would be winning here but not so obvious when you first look at it. I was kinda in a rush to go sleep because it was late at night. I know the annalyses wasnt very high in quality ( Obviousily ) But if there is a part that you wouldd want me to annalyse again in better quality it would be fine.

SebLeb0210
Marcus-Ginantonicus wrote:

They're only teasing you Seb, it's easy for black, but in the game he blundered it away.


ok then, because I do know that there was a few options that he could of played instead.

0random
SebLeb0210 wrote:

Yeah maybe white would be winning here but not so obvious when you first look at it. I was kinda in a rush to go sleep because it was late at night. I know the annalyses wasnt very high in quality ( Obviousily ) But if there is a part that you wouldd want me to annalyse again in better quality it would be fine.

Maybe its not just that this one analysis is bad in quality?? Maybe its not just because its late at night? Maybe its just not possible to ANNALYSE again in better quality??

CoolSealedFoot in MouthFrownYellTongue OutUndecidedMoney MouthSurprisedWink

U MAD BRO?

SebLeb0210
0random wrote:
SebLeb0210 wrote:

Yeah maybe white would be winning here but not so obvious when you first look at it. I was kinda in a rush to go sleep because it was late at night. I know the annalyses wasnt very high in quality ( Obviousily ) But if there is a part that you wouldd want me to annalyse again in better quality it would be fine.

Maybe its not just that this one analysis is bad in quality?? Maybe its not just because its late at night? Maybe its just not possible to ANNALYSE again in better quality??

 

U MAD BRO?

Ofcourse not. But it was actualy late at night though Wink

DrSpudnik

It was a dark and (pawn)stormy night...

AlCzervik

The best of times and the worst of times.

DrSpudnik

It was the March of Dimes.

0random
SebLeb0210 wrote:
0random wrote:
SebLeb0210 wrote:

Yeah maybe white would be winning here but not so obvious when you first look at it. I was kinda in a rush to go sleep because it was late at night. I know the annalyses wasnt very high in quality ( Obviousily ) But if there is a part that you wouldd want me to annalyse again in better quality it would be fine.

Maybe its not just that this one analysis is bad in quality?? Maybe its not just because its late at night? Maybe its just not possible to ANNALYSE again in better quality??

 

U MAD BRO?

Ofcourse not. But it was actualy late at night though 

So are you saying you don't even care about these analyses and you push them back on your very busy coaching schedule all the way back to the night? That is being very disrespectful and a good way to lose customers for your free lessons.

SebLeb0210
0random wrote:
SebLeb0210 wrote:
0random wrote:
SebLeb0210 wrote:

Yeah maybe white would be winning here but not so obvious when you first look at it. I was kinda in a rush to go sleep because it was late at night. I know the annalyses wasnt very high in quality ( Obviousily ) But if there is a part that you wouldd want me to annalyse again in better quality it would be fine.

Maybe its not just that this one analysis is bad in quality?? Maybe its not just because its late at night? Maybe its just not possible to ANNALYSE again in better quality??

 

U MAD BRO?

Ofcourse not. But it was actualy late at night though 

So are you saying you don't even care about these analyses and you push them back on your very busy coaching schedule all the way back to the night? That is being very disrespectful and a good way to lose customers for your free lessons.

Yeah, ummm. Well it happens to be, that I actualy have a life. And I have things to get done. I do care about the annalyses but chess comes second. And plus, there is nothing to risk, its free ! Smile

Benzodiazepine

You look like a 12 years old (no offence).

Scottrf

Well, he was until a few months ago...

SebLeb0210
Benzodiazepine wrote:

You look like a 12 years old (no offence).

Thats because I was 12 when I took that picture.

SebLeb0210
Scottrf wrote:

Well, he was until a few months ago...

lol yes you are right.

ZDragon009

Om what u mean?????????