Unable to understand why this move is a blunder - Chess Forums

Aashranth

Jun 26, 2021

0

#1

Hi all, complete beginner here. I just finished a game (playing as black), analyzed it myself, and then ran the chess.com analysis tool. I can understand most of it, but one move that is classified as a blunder is not clear to me. This is 10. Qe2 d3. The d3 move is classified as a blunder, going from winning to losing.

My thought process at this point was something like this:

My (black) bishop on g4 is threatened by a pawn. It anyway seems tied because if I retreat to h5, then g4 simply returns the pressure and loses the position. I thought it would be ok to sacrifice this bishop to push the pawn ahead from d4 to d3, moving it (the pawn) out of the knight attack, attacking the pinned queen and forcing a queen sacrifice. Indeed at this point I am down in material, but I thought that the forward position of pawn, soon to be supported by rook on d8 (and/or knight on e5) was worth it. This was both considering the potential to check with the pawn and the possibility of promotion. If the knight on e5 gets taken, I don't really mind because my doubled up pawns become free and I can potentially promote another piece.

This is what actually happened in the game as well, but since the engine called it losing and I am very new, I am trying to understand the hole in this plan.

Could you please help me understand this better? Would deeply appreciate your inputs!

flippantzealot

Jun 26, 2021

0

#2

after d3 white queen takes queen and pawn takes g4 bishop

flippantzealot

Jun 26, 2021

0

#3

the advance pawn does not make up for the bishop but u still managed to win . impressive

Aashranth

Jun 26, 2021

0

#4

@flippantzealot - Sure, that's right. Indeed, I do go a piece down for a few moves, but I quickly get a strong forward position in the next 1-2 moves. Is sacrificing the bishop (which I thought is tied down there) not worth that position?

tygxc

Jun 27, 2021

0

#5

No: losing a bishop is very serious and loses your won position.

Aashranth

Jun 27, 2021

0

#6

@tygxc : Thank you for the answer. Just to clarify, are you talking about this position specifically, or in general losing a bishop for an advance pawn?

You're a high rated player, so I'm wondering if you'd have continued the game differently as white - if you'd like to share.

flippantzealot

Jun 27, 2021

0

#7

Aashranth wrote:

@flippantzealot - Sure, that's right. Indeed, I do go a piece down for a few moves, but I quickly get a strong forward position in the next 1-2 moves. Is sacrificing the bishop (which I thought is tied down there) not worth that position?

try annotating your opponent moves then you will understand

king5minblitz119147

Jun 27, 2021

0

#8

the advanced pawn on d3 can't really get past d3 safely so it's not worth sacrificing a piece for. you should be able to judge this from the initial position without having to calculate lines, or at least that should be your goal moving forward from this game.

tygxc

Jun 27, 2021

0

#9

#6
Generally speaking you need 3 pawns for a bishop. Here is an example where white sacrifices a knight for 2 pawns + attack, but black defends and wins.

https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1032520

In your game white blundered back with 21 Bxf6??. Just 21 Rxe4+ would have won.

Aashranth

Jun 27, 2021

0

#10

Thank you so much @flippantzealot, @Pepega_Maximum. @king5minblitz119147 and @tygxc: You've made it very clear. I'm going to keep this in mind in my next games

Jenium

Jun 27, 2021

0

#11

You should only sacrifice material if you get something real, like a mating attack. For positional purposes players usually only sacrifice a pawn, not a bishop.

So just by keeping your material together you will quickly gain 500 points or so.

Aashranth

Jun 27, 2021

0

#12

@Jenium, thanks a lot, that's a good principle to remember.