Yep, It's Brain Damage

After 6.0-0 Nf6 you know what to do... just keep developing and look for tactics.  It'd start with 7.d4.  Black will be forced into defending here for a bit.  e5 is impossible after 7.d4 and Nc6 is bad due to 8.Nb5 followed by 9.Bf4

Your move Re1 is fine too.

Keep putting pressure on (getting all your pieces out and active) and if he offers to trade then ignore it and look for another developing move or bypass the trade by creating a threat.  Ne5 with Bf4 Bc4 Qf3 Rd1 and e1... of course depending on what black does, these are just some general moves.  With Ne5 and Bf4 you're already threatening a move like Ng6 with a double attack so black loses even more time moving the queen again.  After Bc4 in some lines you'll have sac threats on g6 and f7.  The Ne5 and Qf3 combo hits light squares on the queenside (f7,c6,d7) and can be helped with the light square bishop if tactics present themselves.  The Qf3 also pressures the f6 knight if they decide to fianchetto and you can play Bb5 with Ne4 even.  The rooks pressure the center and have threats like d5. 

If everything is defended then don't go crazy thinking you should have already won, patiently reposition, generally avoiding trades, and trying to improve your pieces that are no longer making threats.  This may mean moving a bishop to a long diagonal, moving a knight to a different outpost.  Shifting your queen to the other side of the board.  This should be done just like the opening phase, include all your pieces, don't pick 1 or 2 and reposition them over and over.  It may not seem like it, but your opponent will really be squirming with his cramped position and more often than not you'll find tactics simply appear due to your better position.

Great chess thinking! Dear readers, the distinguished brain surgeon,

Dr. Waffllemaster, is fine tuning my chess brain. Shhh, no talking during this delicate procedure. I don't want a slip to occur, resulting in a frontal lobotomy.  

I've worked out one of your ideas with 7.d4 Nc6? 8.Nb5.

7...Nc6 doesn't look all that bad, especially when playing fast games. It looks like a nice developing move, quite natural. The move 8.Nb5 is down right unpleasant. It's one of those, betcha didn't see that one commin moves.

I entered a few (?) moves in for Black in this fantasy game, that really didn't look all that bad to me. This is tons of fun, and extremely educational.

I'll continue to work on the rest of your ideas. They are just what I was looking for. Thank you!

Placing a few weak moves in the fantasy game above reminded me of a Live Chess game played today. I played the Petroff Defense in a training game with Coach Ziryab some months ago, so I was aware of mistakes that can occur in this opening.

In the game below, Black got greedy with a pawn grab (?) and then missed the discovered check (??) on his king and lost his queen.  Enjoy!

I think it also shows that sometimes a good defense would have been better than a premature attack.

Maybe it's just me, but I usually prefer to make sure that the kingdom is defended before launching afield in an attack.

Nah. It's not just you...and it's good chess thinking.  

I get several premature attacks each day with total disregard to king saftey.  Also, I'm really enjoying those who mess up the Petroff Defense. If I see 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3, I play Nf6!

No exhaustive analysis asked of my games. However, if you do spot one or two moves that signal really dumb chess thinking on my part, then please feel free to hit me with the force of a two by four in the form of a scathing critique. I can use the jolt.

All of the games below were played at 10 0. The rating range was set to 600-900. I used to set it to 800-900, but then would have to wait longer for a game. The pool isn't that big in the under 900 group, I guess. I'll try 700-1000 next time. I lose to guys in the high 900's, but that's o.k., since I need to be challenged by stronger players than me, but not always. It's no fun losing every game.

Yet another victim of the Petroff with that - oops - early pawn grab, followed by a discovery check, losing a queen. I really like the Petroff.

Update: Would you believe I didn't grab a rook that was en prise, while delivering check, for fear that my queen would get trapped by some bishop move. Now that, is over the top dumb thinking.    I've lost my queen too many times before, so I now handle her with extreme care. Ugh!

After 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6, I now play the Scotch with 3.d4! It's such a great opening for rapid and easy development of ALL minor pieces. No more bishops blocked by pawns. I castled, but my opponent did not. I enjoyed tons of space in the center and the stuck king in the center got mated. I lost a kingside pawn somehow. Maybe it was a mistake, but the attack was going so well.

My opponent brought his queen out kinda early. Maybe not a bad move, but it got him in trouble and it turned into another miniature game for me with mate in under 20 moves.

The old 2.Qh5 trick. It didn't go well for my opponent. I get 2.Qh5 often, and have the defense memorized - even teaching to my students who will be playing on chess.com, so they don't get checkmated by this early queen attack. The defense I taught was the following, all from memory, since I've seen it too, too often. 1.e4 e5 2.Qh5 Nc6! 3.Bc4 g6! 4.Qf3! Nf6. Even though Nakamura plays this line as White in Blitz, I think that Black gains a tempo and stands better. I'm happy when White plays a line like this.

I took my sweat time on this one, even taking the time to castle long. Maybe I was listening to a relaxing song at the time.

In a previous topic, I got hammered for not playing 2.d4 when possible. Well, this was not a French or Caro-Kann - I don't know what it was - but I got in 1.e4 and 2.d4. I was most pleased with the space gaining move of 5.d5. Was it a good move?

He's not consistent:

http://www.chess.com/livechess/game.html?id=123285959

Thank you for the link. I couldn't agree more. 

That game clearly shows my weakness in checking for captures and in calculation - if you had seen the amount of time I took on the clock in calculating simple exchanges.  I was working on calculation exercises this morning before logging onto chess.com.

Tactics training teaches tactics, but it doesn't teach calculation, nor does it give me the practice. I've developed exercises to do just that. My play should become more consistent in the next few months after practicing calcultion and being far more attentive to checks, captures and threats.  Here's a game that illustrates the struggles I face with simple calculation, the basic counting of material before an exchange. 

In this game, the correct move was 6...d5. I considered this move, but played 6...d6, because I wasn't sure if I had enough material to survive the exchange. I actually couldn't figure it out, even with plenty of time on the clock. That's my terrible weakness regarding calculation in a nutshell, and the primary reason why I hang pieces. The second reason is tactics. I'm working hard in both areas.

After seeing 6...d5 in my head, I saw 3 pieces attacking my pawn and 3 pieces defending it. I honestly wasn't sure if 6...d5 was going to work. Coach Lux knows I have this problem with calculation and has taught me a simple rule of thumb to figure it all out, and I still get confused...so more practice is required.

This position is from one of my games. I played 6...d6(?). Can Black play d7-d5? White's queen, knight and bishop attack d5. After d7-d5, Black has a queen and two knights defending the d5 square.

After 1.Bxd5 Nbxd5 2.Nxd5 Nxd5 3.Qxd5 Qxd5, Black wins the exchange with a queen, bishop and knight for two knights and a pawn, 15-7. The move, 1.Bxd5, can not be played, so ...d5 can be played. 

With best play, after 1.e3 e5 2.Qh5 Nc6 3.Bc4 g6 4.Qf3 Nf6 (all book moves), 5.Nc3 Nb4 6.Kd1??, if I had played 6...d5, and not 6...d6, then after 7.Be2 Bf5 8.d3 e4 9.Qf4 Bd6 10.Qh4 Be7 11.Qf4 exd3 12.cxd3 0-0 13.a3 Nbxd3 14.Bxd3 Bxd3, Black's advantage is decisive.

After 6...d5, White can play 7.Bb5+, but this move is not best. Better is 7.Be2.

Can anyone here calculate that far in advance before making a move? Dang! I want to get better at this sort of thing...calculation. I will win more games. 

You don't have to calculate in such way, taking a lot of time for a simple move.

Instead, count the attackers to the defenders over your pawn intended to be played in d5; generally as long as attackers (Q,N & B = 3 pices) and defenders (Q, N & N = 3 piceses), no worries in the exchange.

side comments:

* You have of course to consider the order of moves in the exchange ( for example to start with the Bishpos, Not the queen)

* You have to consider side lines threats. For example in your game; may be a3 threatening your Knight should be considered. Of course here you have no worries, but I mean the general idea, of threatening one of the defenders, forcing it to move then to attack.

I hope, I could help a little bit with this. Good Luck!

Can White play Nxd4? How many seconds did it take you to decide?

"Can White play Nxd4? How many seconds did it take you to decide?"  - Tarrasch

After five seconds my answer was yes. Wrong. I hung my knight after 1.Nxd4 Qxd4.

I've been playing the Scotch lately, so even though the center pawns looked different, my brain short circuited and saw it as the Scotch: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Nxd4, where the d-file is closed to Black’s queen.

Thank you.

Maybe this counting method, i.e., 3 attackers vs. 3 defenders, works in reverse when thinking about making a capture? 

In the position from post # 143, there are two attackers vs. two defenders over the pawn at d4. White can't take the pawn with his knight.

Here's a similar, but hypothetical position where there are 3 attackers vs. 2 defenders. White can now capture on d4, but not with just any knight. Tricky stuff for this novice calculator.

I always count how many defenders vs. how many attackers. Ingrained in me since I first started playing chess. A very basic concept...yet one that I don't seem to hear about much, these days. Lotsa talk, though, about "book", "lines", "database", etc.

Concepts...and why they work. That's what I'm talkin' 'bout.

All things being equal, if three pieces are defending and only two attacking...nuh uh...nope. Only if there might be another reason, such as strategic. Usually, though...ain't gonna do it.

Hello. I always enjoy your good spirited posts.

Counting, a chess 101 thing,  has obviously not been beaten into me.

Do strong players still need to count, or do they see the position as one of many memorized patterns, and just know if a piece can be captured, for example?

"All things being equal, if three pieces are defending and only two attacking...nuh uh...nope."

This is what has me bumfuzzled. Even 3 attackers vs. 3 defenders doesn't always cut it when considering a capture. Here's an example, where even with a 3 vs. 3 situation, Black can't play exd4 (?).

no

one second

That's a bit slow for you, being a bullet player and all. ;)

It's easier when you create the position than when you look at one at random. Had I played the moves leading to that position, no calculation would be needed: I would not consider Nxd4.

I've seen you play bullet on many occasions. Many of your moves can be measured in fractions of a second, which means no time for calculation. It's amazing to watch. GM's playing bullet over at ICC, like Nakamura, well, it's just human. Those guys have comic book super powers. 

How you and others are able to play so incredibly fast with very little calculation, while I go into a deep think on a pawn break in a slighter altered Giuoco Piano, escapes my understanding.

 no should not take instead white should move Qb5 instead (took me 5 sec.)

60,000 games does something to the mind, and to pattern recognition.

It's important to recognize that 1) my opponents lack the skills of GMs, and even most often of FMs, and 2) I lose 40% of my games.