Why an attack is often not enough

dukemed2011

I have lost games where I started the attack many times. I have come to the conclusion that you must always look for the best possible moves when attacking, otherwise you risk losing your game.

The following game shows this well. My opponent should have won, but because he was not precise enough in his attack, he ended up losing.

Here is the game:



AndyClifton
dukemed2011 wrote:

I have come to the conclusion that you must always look for the best possible moves when attacking, otherwise you risk losing your game.

 

Now that's what I call a real breakthrough.

Skwerly

he should have resigned long before he did; well played!

georgecaplan

Black should have won around move 15

neeraj_sinha

On the 13th move instead of c6, Black should have moved Qxh3. White had only one place to go in its 14th move i.e. Kg1. The game would have been just one move away when Black would give a check mate on the 15th move my Kg2 ! Indeed it was a game that Black threw over. Congrats!

AndyClifton

Er...move that suggestion ahead one move and you're right. Smile

neeraj_sinha

Oh yeah, I meant on the 14th move instead of bxc6, Black should have moved Qxh3 ;-)

AndyClifton

Btw the OP mentioned that in his notes.