| |
Main
Date: 31 Oct 2005 12:42:50
From: Richard
Subject: A new game posted
|
I just posted a new game on my site that turned out to be a lot of fun
to annotate. Please check it out and feel free to make any comments
(keeping in mind I am a very low ranking player :) )
Also, just for fun I added some google links on the site. Supposedly,
this could generate some income. In the 4 days it has been there, I've
accumulated $0.95! Since Google sends out payment evertime you reach
$100, I can expect a check sometime in the middle of 2007. I think I
need to keep my day job for a little while longer :)
(I all seriousness, if anyone has a real problem with these links, I
would be happy to remove them.)
Thanks,
Richard
http://richardschess.blogspot.com
|
|
| |
Date: 04 Nov 2005 09:03:42
From: Richard
Subject: Re: A new game posted
|
Hi Bark!,
I just left some comments on your blog. I like the way you were
thinking about things. I do spend a good amount of time looking at GM
games, but I also spend a lot of time analysing my own games. I have
been told a few times that low rated games are too full of errors to
learn much from, but for me, I am trying to learn about errors so I can
correct them. I'm sure there will come a day that my analysis will
consist more of understanding subtlties and fine points of strategey,
but for now, the most improvement I will make will be in just seeing an
attack comming before I'm in the middle of it wondering what to do
next.
Thanks,
Richard
http://richardschess.blogspot.com
|
| | |
Date: 04 Nov 2005 17:16:46
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: A new game posted
|
Richard <[email protected] > wrote:
> I just left some comments on your blog. I like the way you were
> thinking about things. I do spend a good amount of time looking at GM
> games, but I also spend a lot of time analysing my own games. I have
> been told a few times that low rated games are too full of errors to
> learn much from, but for me, I am trying to learn about errors so I can
> correct them.
*Other people's* low-rated games aren't much value for you to study.
Studying your own games (whatever your rating) is one of the most
important things you can do. Learning to correct your own mistakes leads
to improvement; learning to correct other people's mistakes doesn't seem
to be as valuable, though it might prevent you from making those mistakes
yourself.
Actually, it occurs to me that going through the odd game by lower-rated
players is useful for tactics practice. :-)
Dave.
--
David Richerby Unholy Postman (TM): it's like a man
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ who delivers the mail but it's also
a crime against nature!
|
| |
Date: 02 Nov 2005 10:25:55
From: Richard
Subject: Re: A new game posted
|
David,
Thank you very much for the comments. There is a lot for me to learn
here. I'll try to correct the notation problems in the future. I think
it may be good excersise for me to go over the game again, but this
time focus on missed tactical opportunities.
Thanks,
Richard
http://richardschess.blogspot.com
|
| | |
Date: 03 Nov 2005 09:22:38
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: A new game posted
|
Richard <[email protected] > wrote:
> Thank you very much for the comments. There is a lot for me to learn
> here. I'll try to correct the notation problems in the future. I think
> it may be good excersise for me to go over the game again, but this
> time focus on missed tactical opportunities.
I think that would be a very good idea, yes. There are plenty of tactical
opportunities in the game and looking for them will help you recognize
such opportunities in the sort of position you get into.
Another thing that would help is to get one of the tactics books. I've
not looked at the Polgar book but I believe that it starts with plenty of
1- and 2-move tactics that shouldn't be too hard, and then graduates onto
harder problems. The Reinfeld books are a bit more mixed in their
difficulty levels but the 1001 Checkmates book seems to me to be a little
easier because you always know you're aiming for checkmate.
What I forgot to mention in my comments is that I think you did a very
good job of exploiting your opponent's mistakes and generally planless
play. This is a very good sign. :-)
Dave.
--
David Richerby Slimy Carnivorous Tool (TM): it's like
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ a screwdriver but it's full of teeth
and covered in goo!
|
| |
Date: 02 Nov 2005 12:07:03
From: Major Cat
Subject: Re: A new game posted
|
Richard wrote:
>
> Thanks. I own a couple of chess programs that can be used to analyze,
> but I choose not to use them. At the level I play, the computers just
> point out a better move for almost every position. I find this
> discouraging.
For now, you may want to focus on suggested moves
that change the material balance in the game and
forget about the rest. Over time, this should im-
prove your understanding of tactics.
> Besides, I am trying to improve not just my rating, but
> my understanding of the game. As a beginning player I feel I need to
> focus on the overall scheme of things and not get too caught up in the
> details. The truth is, I don't mind losing a game, but I do mind not
> understanding why I won or loss. Most of the people I play are a little
> stronger than me, but they are still low rated players and make a lot
> of blunders. Most of the time, however, I don't see the blunders until
> I have finished the game and am looking it over later. I am learning a
> lot about tactics this way. But still my focus is on strategy and being
> able to make and follow a plan.
Well written books and articles will help you
here, not computers.
> This is where I think my best
> improvement will be made.
>
> Thanks,
> Richard
> http://richardschess.blogspot.com
Major Cat
|
| | |
Date: 03 Nov 2005 09:17:12
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: A new game posted
|
Major Cat <[email protected] > wrote:
> Richard wrote:
>> Thanks. I own a couple of chess programs that can be used to analyze,
>> but I choose not to use them. At the level I play, the computers just
>> point out a better move for almost every position. I find this
>> discouraging.
>
> For now, you may want to focus on suggested moves that change the
> material balance in the game and forget about the rest. Over time, this
> should improve your understanding of tactics.
Yes -- setting the computer to only point out moves that would improve the
score by at least a whole pawn (maybe even two) would be a good
idea. That way, the computer will point out missed tactics but stay quiet
about positional improvements.
Dave.
--
David Richerby Erotic.com (TM): it's like an
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ E-commerce portal but it's genuinely
erotic!
|
| |
Date: 02 Nov 2005 17:01:32
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: A new game posted
|
Richard <[email protected] > wrote:
> I just posted a new game on my site that turned out to be a lot of fun
> to annotate. Please check it out and feel free to make any comments
> (keeping in mind I am a very low ranking player :) )
My comments on your game. I was looking at it without a board so I've
probably missed plenty of tactics.
Just a small point but could you use proper notation, please? Put the x's
in captures (`cd' is OK for pawn captures) and the +'s in for checks. It
makes the game much easier to follow in your head.
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 c5 4.d5 c4??
You comment here that the queen is the only defender of the Black king.
This is not true. Other pieces are defended by ensuring that, if your
opponent captures your piece, you'll capture the capturer. But this
doesn't work for the king! The king is defended by controlling the area
around it. So, Black's king is defended, to varying degrees, by the
queen, both bishops and both knights. On the other hand, the f7 pawn *is*
weak -- it's only defended by the king and this is why it's the prime
target for attack. I'd say that it's far too early to be thinking about
attack and you should just develop.
5.Bxc4
Correct, taking a free pawn with development. Black has spent two tempi
to throw away a pawn.
5... Nd7
Better is 5... Nf6 attacking your undefended e-pawn.
6.Bb5 a6 7.Bg5??
Beginners seem to like doing this. The standard reaction to a piece being
attacked is to attack something else without checking whether this
works. Bg5 fails for two reasons. Firstly, there's the check that your
opponent plays. Always check for checks -- they effectively mean that
your opponent gets two moves. Secondly, even if ...Qa5 didn't work, your
opponent could just play ...f6, after which both your bishops are under
attack. I notice that you notice this problem later in the game. Well
done! It's good that you worked this out for yourself.
7... Qa5+ 8.Nc3 axb5 9.O-O b4? [achieves nothing] 10.Ne2 [forced] f6?
Awful -- weakens the kingside (Qh5+ may become a threat), takes away the
Nb8's best square and critically hems in the Bf8. In fact, the Bf8 is now
so bad that you can almost consider yourself to have got your piece back
until your opponent can get the bishop into the game.
11.Bd2 Nh6 12.c3 b3? 13.axb3 Qxa1 14.Qxa1 Rxa1 15.Rxa1 Ng4?
(15... Nc5 wins back a pawn.)
You're right -- this is a good time to stop and take stock of the
position. Black is a piece for two pawns up but White has much better
development. White is a little cramped but c3-c4 will let the bishop out
and allow Nc3. The rook on a1 is excellent and has full control of
the only open file. Black needs to spend quite a while untangling his
pieces.
16.Ra8! Kd8 17.b4!
Prevents ...Nc5 so keeps it hard for Black to untangle.
17... b5!?
Prevents c4, so keeps it hard for White to untangle. :-)
18.b3 Nb6 19.Ra5 g5 20.Rxb5 Nd7
Threat: 21... Ba6 wins the exchange: 22.Nc3 Bxb5 23.Nxb5.
21.c4 f5?! [Use some pieces for once in your life, will you?] 22.Bg5+ Be7
23.c5??
Ouch. Walks into the skewer and does nothing to deal with the threat to
the e-pawn.
23... Ba6! 24.Bxe7+
This is actually OK. Black is forced to deal with the check and Kxe7 is
the only move. Now, in general, you don't want to be trading pieces when
you're down on material but, after ...fxe4, attacking the Bg5's only
defender, you were going to be forced to play Bxe7+ anyway. It doesn't
hurt to do it now.
24... Kxe7 25.cxd6+
Forcing so OK. Otherwise, Black will win a pawn after exploiting the pin.
25... Kxd6 26.Ra5??
OK, so you have to lose some material but why a whole piece? 26.Nc3 Bxb5
27.Nxb5 and you only lose the exchange, which is much better than losing a
piece.
26... Bxe2
It's fair to say that you're totally lost here, two pieces for four pawns
down. OK, you have passed pawns but they're not far advanced so Black has
all the time in the world to use his extra pieces to blockade and capture
them. So, the only way you can win this is to turn one of those extra
pawns into an extra queen. Even that looks doomed to fail, though: Black
can just play ...Rb8 and the pawn can't advance without being taken by the
bishop.
27.Ng5 Rc8
You say, ``Black sees the opportunity for a back-rank mate here. The only
way to prevent it is to defend the rank.'' This isn't the case -- you can
also defend by creating an escape square for your king, though 28.g3 fxe4
29.Nxe4+ Ke7 isn't too pleasant as ...Bf3 wins the knight.
28.Ra1 [probably best] Rg8 29.Nxh7
This doesn't win a pawn as 29... Rh8 wins the h2-pawn back.
29... f4?
Huh? OK, doubled pawns are bad but 29... fxe4 wins a whole pawn, which is
much more important. (If 30.Re1, then ...Bd3.) October's _Novice Nook_
column explains that winning material is nearly always more important than
positional considerations:
http://www.chesscafe.com/heisman/heisman.htm
You do read that every month, don't you? :-)
30.h3 [Good -- gets rid of that knight and creates an escape square] Nh6
31.Re1 Bd3 32.Ra1??
This drops a whole piece. After either 32... Rg7, the Nh7 has nowhere to
go and cannot be protected. It follows that you *must* play 32.h4 to
allow 33.Ng5.
32... Bxe4
This is fine, though ...Rg7 is better. Your b-pawns can't queen: if the
worst comes to the worst, Black can swap them for two of his minor pieces
and still be up on material (assuming he takes the Nh7).
33.b5?
The disadvantage of ...Bxe4 is that it left a6 uncovered. 33.Ra6+ Kxd5
34.Rxh6 Bxg7+ 35.Kh7 Rb8 is better but those b-pawns aren't going
anywhere.
33... f3?
33... Kxd4 avoids the nasty skewer (X-ray). The knight on h7 isn't going
anywhere and can be picked off at Black's leisure.
34.Ra6+! Kc5 35.d6??
Free knight on h6!
35... fxg2 36.Ra7 Kxb5!? 37.Rxd7?
Unluckily for you, it turns out that the knight is indirectly protected by
a mate threat.
37... Bf5
Correct is 37... Ra8! (threat: 38... Ra1+ 39.Kh2 g1Q#) 38.Rg7 Ra1+ 39.Rh2
Kh1+ 40.Kg3 g1Q+ 41.Kh4 Nf5+ 42.Kh5 Rxh3# (I think -- I don't have a board
with me or any chess software on this computer).
38.Re7 Bxh3 39.d7 Rd8?
You're right: this is bad. Black still has the Ra8-h1-h8 idea and it
mates even more quickly without White pawn in the way on h3.
40.Ng5?
It seems to me that you can get at least a draw with 40.Nf8!?, with the
threat of 41.Re8 Rxd7 42.Nxd7 Bxd7 43.Rxe5.
40... Nf5??
Black can just play 40... Bxd7, removing White's only threat, though it's
no longer clear that he's significantly ahead after 41.Kxg2.
41.Ne6 Nxe7 42.Nxd8 Nc6??
A truly, truly awful move. Black has to play 42... Bxd7 43.Kxg2 with a
probable draw.
43.Nxc6 Kxc6 44.d8Q
and Black may as well resign here. You claim that the endgame has now
begun but, in fact it's practically over. The endgame began somewhere
about move 25, where the main goal became the promotion of pawns.
You were very lucky to win this game but it's good that you realised that
your only hope of salvation was to promote a pawn and that you stuck to
this task. Apart from dropping a piece, I think your play in the opening
and early middlegame was good. You have a reasonable positional
understanding, which is a really good sign. However, at the moment, your
tactics are lagging behind and you should sharpen those before trying to
learn too much more positional stuff.
Dave.
--
David Richerby Accelerated Generic Projector (TM):
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ it's like a 16mm film projector but
it's just like all the others and
twice as fast!
|
| |
Date: 01 Nov 2005 15:04:45
From: Richard
Subject: Re: A new game posted
|
Thanks. I own a couple of chess programs that can be used to analyze,
but I choose not to use them. At the level I play, the computers just
point out a better move for almost every position. I find this
discouraging. Besides, I am trying to improve not just my rating, but
my understanding of the game. As a beginning player I feel I need to
focus on the overall scheme of things and not get too caught up in the
details. The truth is, I don't mind losing a game, but I do mind not
understanding why I won or loss. Most of the people I play are a little
stronger than me, but they are still low rated players and make a lot
of blunders. Most of the time, however, I don't see the blunders until
I have finished the game and am looking it over later. I am learning a
lot about tactics this way. But still my focus is on strategy and being
able to make and follow a plan. This is where I think my best
improvement will be made.
Thanks,
Richard
http://richardschess.blogspot.com
|
| |
Date: 01 Nov 2005 14:55:11
From: Richard
Subject: Re: A new game posted
|
Thanks for the comments Bark! I haven't had time to look them over yet,
but hopefully tonight I will be able to sit down with the board and
have some study time. (I have two young children and with Halloween I
haven't been able to focus on much but improving my costume making
skills :) )
Thanks,
Richard
|
| | |
Date: 03 Nov 2005 23:35:51
From: Bark!
Subject: Re: A new game posted
|
Na njuzima:[email protected],
Richard <[email protected] > mukotrpnim radom izna�e ovu umotvorinu:
> Thanks for the comments Bark! I haven't had time to look them over
> yet, but hopefully tonight I will be able to sit down with the board
> and have some study time. (I have two young children and with
> Halloween I haven't been able to focus on much but improving my
> costume making skills :) )
>
> Thanks,
> Richard
http://improveyourchess.blogspot.com
Updated. A little text - no games.
|
| |
Date: 01 Nov 2005 10:28:00
From: Few Good Chessmen
Subject: Re: A new game posted
|
Richard <[email protected] > typed:
> I just posted a new game on my site that turned out to be a lot of fun
> to annotate. Please check it out and feel free to make any comments
> (keeping in mind I am a very low ranking player :) )
>
> Also, just for fun I added some google links on the site. Supposedly,
> this could generate some income. In the 4 days it has been there, I've
> accumulated $0.95! Since Google sends out payment evertime you reach
> $100, I can expect a check sometime in the middle of 2007. I think I
> need to keep my day job for a little while longer :)
>
> (I all seriousness, if anyone has a real problem with these links, I
> would be happy to remove them.)
Please don't. It's rare to find original self-analysis unaided (More so at your
Chess Level).
-----------------------------------------------
"every moves you make; i be watching you..."
|
| |
Date: 31 Oct 2005 23:35:24
From: Bark!
Subject: Re: A new game posted
|
Na njuzima:[email protected],
Richard <[email protected] > mukotrpnim radom izna�e ovu umotvorinu:
> I just posted a new game on my site that turned out to be a lot of fun
> to annotate. Please check it out and feel free to make any comments
> (keeping in mind I am a very low ranking player :) )
>
> Also, just for fun I added some google links on the site. Supposedly,
> this could generate some income. In the 4 days it has been there, I've
> accumulated $0.95! Since Google sends out payment evertime you reach
> $100, I can expect a check sometime in the middle of 2007. I think I
> need to keep my day job for a little while longer :)
>
> (I all seriousness, if anyone has a real problem with these links, I
> would be happy to remove them.)
>
> Thanks,
> Richard
> http://richardschess.blogspot.com
Here are my tips.
Position after 3rd move. Did you consider taking the pawn? If you take
4.dxe5 dxe5 the d file is clear and you can take his queen and when he
retakes with his king he loses the right to castle. He doesn't have to take
it right away. He can play Qa5 but you win a pawn no matter how he responds.
Analyse the position and you'll see.
Move 15. You have 2 knights and a closed position so you should strive to
exchange you bishop and maintain closed game. So 16. h3 Nh6 17.Bxh6 (plus
you double his pawns) gxh6 18. b4 to prevent black's knight development to
c5. If he tries Nb6 b3 blocks the whole game.
Move 22. I would recommend Ng3. It attacks black's pawn and defends white's
pawn. I think c5 is made too early. Take care of the undefended e4 pawn then
play c5.
Move 23. Even though Ba6 pins your pieces you are still better. Ok, he
attackes you. How can you defend you rook and attack? Ra5!! If he takes you
knight you play Ra8 with check and with taking the black rook to follow. So
you are even better. But when you played Bxe7, Ra5 doesn't work anymore...
Move 32. 33.Ra6 K~ 34.Rxh6 I think this is lost for white.
Move 35. Notice that he could have played Rxg2 This was his mistake.
Move 37. After you played Rxd7 he has Ra8 and now you're really lost. His
next couple of moves will be Ra1, Rh1, g1=Q..... Pretty much game over.
Move 38. You are back to the game if you play correctly. Black's pawn is
undefended! And it allows your rook to get to h5 with tempo to make a fork.
So 39.Rxe5+ K~ 40.Rh5!! You are back in the game.
Move 41. Ok. In last couple of moves you missed knight taking the rook and
Rxe5 still works on move 39., 40....
Move 43. OMG!! You lucky bastard! :)
BTW congratulations on this win, see ya
|
|
