Main
Date: 19 Jul 2005 16:17:27
From:
Subject: Please analyze my game
A rather dull game, but interesting for me because my opponent, 438
rating points above me and an IM, is the strongest player I've ever
drawn with. No doubt the IM was having a bad day, as he also drew with
an expert in the previous round. I had White.

1.e4 e6 2.Nc3 d5 3.Nf3 Bb4 4.a3 Be7 5.d4 dxe4 6.Nxe4 Nd7 7.Bd3 Ngf6
8.0-0 Nxe4 9.Bxe4 Nf6 10.Bd3 c5 11.Be3 Qc7 12.Qe2 0-0 13.dxc5 Bxc5
14.Bg5 Nd5 15.g3 f6 16.Bd2 Rd8 17.c4 Ne7 18.b4 Bd4 19.Nxd4 Rxd4 20.Bc3
Rd8 21.f4 Ng6 22.Rac1 Nf8 23.Be4 Bd7 24.Qf3 Bc6 25.Bxc6 bxc6 26.Rcd1
Rxd1 27.Rxd1 Rd8 28.Rd3 a6 29.Qd1 Rxd3 30.Qxd3 Qd7 31.Qd4 Kf7 32.Kf2
Qxd4+ 33.Bxd4 Nd7 34.Kf3 e5 35.fxe5 fxe5 36.Ba7 Ke7 37.a5 Kd6 38.b5
cxb5 39.cxb5 axb5 40.axb5 Kd5 41.Be3 Nf6 42.g4 Ne8 43.g5 g6 44.Bf2 Nd6
45.b6 Kc6 46.h4 Kd5 =





 
Date: 06 Aug 2005 03:41:43
From: matt -`;'-
Subject: Re: Please analyze my game

<[email protected] > wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> A rather dull game, but interesting for me because my opponent, 438
> rating points above me and an IM, is the strongest player I've ever
> drawn with. No doubt the IM was having a bad day, as he also drew with
> an expert in the previous round. I had White.
>
> 1.e4 e6 2.Nc3 d5 3.Nf3 Bb4 4.a3 Be7 5.d4 dxe4 6.Nxe4 Nd7 7.Bd3 Ngf6
> 8.0-0 Nxe4 9.Bxe4 Nf6 10.Bd3 c5 11.Be3 Qc7 12.Qe2 0-0 13.dxc5 Bxc5
> 14.Bg5 Nd5 15.g3 f6 16.Bd2 Rd8 17.c4 Ne7 18.b4 Bd4 19.Nxd4 Rxd4 20.Bc3
> Rd8 21.f4 Ng6 22.Rac1 Nf8 23.Be4 Bd7 24.Qf3 Bc6 25.Bxc6 bxc6 26.Rcd1
> Rxd1 27.Rxd1 Rd8 28.Rd3 a6 29.Qd1 Rxd3 30.Qxd3 Qd7 31.Qd4 Kf7 32.Kf2
> Qxd4+ 33.Bxd4 Nd7 34.Kf3 e5 35.fxe5 fxe5 36.Ba7 Ke7 37.a5 Kd6 38.b5
> cxb5 39.cxb5 axb5 40.axb5 Kd5 41.Be3 Nf6 42.g4 Ne8 43.g5 g6 44.Bf2 Nd6
> 45.b6 Kc6 46.h4 Kd5 =
>

I wrote my thoughts on your game. Hope they are at least interesting.

[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "?"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]

1. e4 e6 2. Nc3
{I prefer d4 against the French aiming for the advance version. The Knight does not really offer much unless there is some long
range plan involving Q-side castling.}
2... d5
{With this move it is easy to see why d4 would have been better because it eliminates the threat against the c3 Knight. Alternative
to allowing d5-d4 there could follow exd5 exd5, Qe2+ followed by black covering with B, N but not the Q that prevents Nxd5.
Essentially an attack that has no collaboration of any other pieces hints that it is too soon.}
3. Nf3
{This shows that there is a lack of plan at the game start for developing pieces or a late plan. King safety would recommend that
the pieces from one side be developed quickly to allow castling. By developing both Knights and because of the threat of d5xe4 or
d5-d4 there would be a loss of tempo for white resulting from this method of development.}
3... Bb4 {Adding pressure.} 4. a3
{Chasing the Bishop. Black attacked too soon and without a plan. Unless weakening a potential Q-side castle was the idea.}
4... Be7 5. d4 {Seizing d4, preventing the d5-d4 attack.} 5... dxe4
{But not preventing the e4 attack.} 6. Nxe4 Nd7
{Where is the Knight going? Nf6 to attack the e4 Knight?} 7. Bd3
{Good for protecting the Knight and making ready to caslte. Also good because the Bishop is not readily attacked at this position.}
7... Ngf6
{A developing move. Perhaps the other Knight is there to overprotect the f6 Knight. This looks a bit cramped.}
8. O-O Nxe4
{Is black trading to prevent a cramped position? No. It is not that badly cramped on the Black side as a result of the white pieces.
This move is not beneficial.}
9. Bxe4 Nf6 {Yes you can chase a piece, but for what reason?} 10. Bd3 c5
{This is the point I sometimes overlook when playing. Step back a move and think - where can the f6 Knight go? The effects of the
Knight can be seen several moves later.}
11. Be3 Qc7
{Black could be aiming the Q at h2 but would need the f3 Knight to be gone then the support of another piece to attack. The problem
is that the Black King is a sitting duck and the other pieces are not lined up well except for the Knight on f6.}
12. Qe2
{Planning something with the Bishop? Or perhaps a battery using the Rook on the e file? The problem is the pawn on e6 is blocking
the way to the King and there is no means to remove the pawn since f2 is blocked and d4 may not make it that far.}
12... O-O 13. dxc5
{The d file is now open but there was no preperation of a Rook on the file and the d3 Bishop hinders the open file.}
13... Bxc5 14. Bg5 {Nothing gained.} 14... Nd5
{Where can the Knight go from here?} 15. g3
{Not to f4. Now the castle is weakened on the light squares.} 15... f6 16. Bd2
Rd8 {Making ready for some Rook attacks on the d file.} 17. c4
{White begins to sieze the initiative.} 17... Ne7 18. b4 {And again.} 18... Bd4
{Presumedly a tradoff to prevent doubled pawns in the event of Bd6 c4, Be5 Nxe5, fxe5. Using the pawn instead of the Queen to keep
her majesty on the board in the calculated variation.}
19. Nxd4 Rxd4 20. Bc3 Rd8 21. f4
{Getting a little open around the King. Does this move really accomplish anything?}
21... Ng6
{You have to ask where can the Knight go from here? Is the plan Nf8, Nd7, Nb6 attacking the c4 pawn? There are few useful squares
for the steed.}
22. Rac1
{Why here? It would be nice if the c4 pawn were not present, then a revealed attack would be presented by moving the Bishop. But I
do not see the point of this move.}
22... Nf8 23. Be4
{Achieving some control of the center while stepping from the Rook attack line.}
23... Bd7 {Tying the rooks.} 24. Qf3
{I like Qc2 better. Aim the battery at the King.} 24... Bc6
{Black has no plan but to trade off pieces to gain some space.} 25. Bxc6 bxc6
{A weakening of the Q-side pawns.} 26. Rcd1
{This only encourages an exchange. There is not enough of a positional advantage for white to try this now.}
26... Rxd1 27. Rxd1 Rd8 28. Rd3 a6 29. Qd1
{This encourages an exchange that leaves White temporarily in control of the d file.}
29... Rxd3 30. Qxd3 Qd7 31. Qd4 {Standoff.} 31... Kf7 32. Kf2 Qxd4+
{Black decides to try and endgame without the Queen. I think that is not such a good idea considering the pawn structure and N vs
B.}
33. Bxd4 Nd7
{Just a supporting position since the Knight is unable to really move around.}
34. Kf3 e5 35. fxe5 fxe5 36. Ba7 Ke7 37. a4 {Nice wall of pawns.} 37... Kd6 38.
b5
{This is not 3 against 3 pawns. I wonder if a4-a5 followed by b4-b5 would not have been better. Maybe could have gotten a pawn
headed for the border on the a file.}
(38. a5 c5 39. b5 axb5 40. cxb5 c4 41. a6 Kc7 42. Ke2
{And where can Black go that does not lose?}) 38... cxb5 39. cxb5 axb5 40. axb5
Kd5 41. Be3 {Looks like there is no way to force a win from what I see.} 41...
Nf6 42. g4 Ne8 43. g5 g6 44. Bf2 Nd6 45. b6 Kc6 46. h4 Kd5 *




  
Date: 09 Aug 2005 20:32:09
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: Please analyze my game
I've made some comments on your comments. Without wanting to sound rude,
it seems that you have in mind a number of `rules' about the opening in
particular that are either mistaken or misunderstood. Apologies if any of
the following is nonsense -- I've come down with the 'flu. :-(

matt -`;'- <[email protected] > wrote:
> [Event "?"]
> [Site "?"]
> [Date "????.??.??"]
> [Round "?"]
> [White "Fred Galvin"]
> [Black "?"]
> [Result "1/2-1/2"]
>
> 1. e4 e6 2. Nc3
> {I prefer d4 against the French aiming for the advance version. The
> Knight does not really offer much unless there is some long range plan
> involving Q-side castling.}

I prefer d4, too, but there are plenty of reasons for playing Nc3 that
have nothing to do with queenside castling. Consider that, in almost all
the queen's pawn openings, white plays 1.d4 2.c4 3.Nc3 and almost always
castles short.


> 2... d5 3. Nf3
> {This shows that there is a lack of plan at the game start for
> developing pieces or a late plan. King safety would recommend that the
> pieces from one side be developed quickly to allow castling.

But even after 2.Nc3, White is still three moves away from castling long
and only two moves from castling short. And there's no immediate threat
on the king in the centre so no hurry to castle right now.


> By developing both Knights and because of the threat of d5xe4 or d5-d4
> there would be a loss of tempo for white resulting from this method of
> development.}


There's no loss of tempo. White's probably going to have to play Nf3 at
some point anyway and it costs Black and White a tempo each to exchange
pawns on e4.


> 3... Bb4 4. a3 {Chasing the Bishop. Black attacked too soon and without
> a plan. Unless weakening a potential Q-side castle was the idea.}

More likely, Black was offering a transposition into the Winawer variation
after 4.e5


> 4... Be7 5. d4 dxe4 6. Nxe4 Nd7
> {Where is the Knight going? Nf6 to attack the e4 Knight?}

Black wants to play Ngf6 and meet Nxf6 with Nxf6 instead of Bxf6. The
bishop is no use at all on f6, especially after Ne2 and c3.


> 7. Bd3 Ngf6
> {A developing move. Perhaps the other Knight is there to overprotect
> the f6 Knight. This looks a bit cramped.}

Overprotection is something that happens to pawns. The idea is that, when
the pawn moves or is exchanged, square it was on becomes a launching point
for an attack or occupation by pieces.


> 8. O-O Nxe4
> {Is black trading to prevent a cramped position? No.

A move ago, you said that the position looked `a bit cramped'. How has
White's castling made Black less cramped?


> It is not that badly cramped on the Black side as a result of the white
> pieces. This move is not beneficial.}

This move is definitely beneficial. You were right first time in that
Black's position is cramped and, by this move, Black exchanges off a minor
piece with tempo.


> 9. Bxe4 Nf6
> {Yes you can chase a piece, but for what reason?}

1) The gain of tempo.
2) The black knight is much better placed on f6 than d7.
3) The white bishop is better placed on e4 than on d3. With it on e4,
Black doesn't have the option of fianchettoing his bishop, which might
be a good way of developing it.


> 10. Bd3 c5 11. Be3 Qc7
> {Black could be aiming the Q at h2 but would need the f3 Knight to be
> gone then the support of another piece to attack.

I think you've missed the threat of 12.dxc5. :-)


> 12. Qe2
> {Planning something with the Bishop? Or perhaps a battery using the
> Rook on the e file?

There's usually not a lot of use having a battery with a queen at the
front placed against a rook -- it means that either something is pinned
against the queen or there's the possibility of a discovered attack.


> 12... O-O 13. dxc5 Bxc5 14. Bg5 {Nothing gained.} 14... Nd5
> {Where can the Knight go from here?}

You think only in terms of where pieces can go but this cannot be the sole
criterion -- after all, where can the Black king go from g8? Why would
anyone respond to 1.e4 with 1...e5? The point of Nd5 here is that it is
on a central square that's hard to attack (except by trading a bishop for
it) and prevents White from using f4.


Dave.


--
David Richerby Flammable Atom Bomb (TM): it's like
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ a weapon of mass destruction but it
burns really easily!


 
Date: 21 Jul 2005 14:43:51
From:
Subject: Re: Please analyze my game


Ron wrote:

> I have no idea why black would play this way, except insomuch as
> everyone has off days.

Thanks again for your sensible analysis. Looks good to me. I wouldn't
want to speculate on why my opponent played like a 1500 player; I
refrained from naming the player or the event, but conceivably somebody
could figure it out. Another mystery is how I could have a 2000+ rating
while knowing so little about chess!

> 5. ... Nf6 (... dxe4 looks like a ? move to me. Note how black is two
> tempos down on the move order 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Be7 -
> white has gotten in a3 for free, and has developed his king knight;

Only one tempo, I think. White has a3 for free, but playing Nf3 instead
of d4 doesn't gain a tempo.



  
Date: 09 Aug 2005 18:11:53
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: Please analyze my game
<[email protected] > wrote:
> Another mystery is how I could have a 2000+ rating while knowing so
> little about chess!

If you've had a 2000+ rating for any length of time, it seems that either
you're incredibly lucky or you know more about chess than you think you
do. To paraphrase Rumsfeld, perhaps chess is not a `known known' for
you? :-)


Dave.

--
David Richerby Lead Tongs (TM): it's like a pair of
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ tongs that weighs a ton!


 
Date: 20 Jul 2005 22:53:35
From:
Subject: Re: Please analyze my game


Ron wrote:
> Take all my comments with a rather large grain of salt. I haven't had
> much success against experts, myself.

Thanks a lot for your comments, Ron. They make a lot of sense to me,
and I hope I learned something from them. What I'm wondering now is,
given all my aimless woodpushing in the middlegame, why didn't the IM
crush me? He must have been off his feed or under the weather or
something, obviously he didn't get that rating by giving draws to
patzers. So, where would you improve *Black's* play, to punish White's
lethargic play?



  
Date: 21 Jul 2005 07:28:29
From: Ron
Subject: Re: Please analyze my game
In article <[email protected] >,
[email protected] wrote:

> What I'm wondering now is,
> given all my aimless woodpushing in the middlegame, why didn't the IM
> crush me? He must have been off his feed or under the weather or
> something, obviously he didn't get that rating by giving draws to
> patzers. So, where would you improve *Black's* play, to punish White's
> lethargic play?

I have no idea why black would play this way, except insomuch as
everyone has off days.

Some moves that look like improvements to me:

4. ... Bxc3 5.dxc Nf6 (6.e5 Ne4)

5. ... Nf6 (... dxe4 looks like a ? move to me. Note how black is two
tempos down on the move order 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Be7 -
white has gotten in a3 for free, and has developed his king knight; and
few people would play 4.Be7 in that position anyway, although the bishop
may well end up there eventually.)

10. ... 0-0; black is behind in development. Get the king to safety
before further opening the center.

11. ... Nd5 ( a good square for the N) or ... cxd5 (a more logical
followup to c5).

15. ... h6 (driving the bishop away without turning e6 into a target)
Also keeps f6 available for the N to retreat to when it's kicked by c4.
on 15. ...h6 16. Bh4 Be7 allows the N to come back home.

16. Bd7, maybe. Also a possibility on move 22. Basically, his pieces
are a mess, and he's got to find a way to get them organized. You really
see the flaws of f6 (a ? move) in the contortions black is going through
to keep a minor piece guarding e6. He would love to do something like
Bd7-c6, allowing him to get his a8-rook into play, but he can't because
of the weak pawn on e6.

24. Since Bc6 seems to lead to an unfavorable endgame, he should have
kept looking for something else here.

26. Black needs to be thinking about activating his knight (notice how
many moves he wasted to move it to a square where it's now useless)
rather than trading rooks into an unfavorable endgame. But a lot of
strong players, I've noticed, have a sort of default confidence in your
endgame. By trading rooks he's either made a better analysis than mine
of the coming endgame (which is entirely possible) or he's saying, "eh,
this guy isn't strong enough to be much on an endgame player." - in the
later case, unfortunately, he was proved right.

Although it's not like the middlegame is favorable, it seems like he'd
be better served by activating his pieces than by trading them off.

So basically, it looks to me like black falls behind in development and
then opens the position anyway. He compounds this problem by
voluntarily creating a weakness for you to attack. He then seeks refuge
in an endgame where he outplays you, earning a drawn from an inferior
position.

And somewhere, right now, an IM is having a heart attack at being
criticized (probably erroneously - I half expect one of the strong
players on the ng to say, "You idiot, f6 was a genius move! His best
chance of saving the game!") by a weak player like me.

Quite frankly, I would have guessed that black was below 1500 in this
game, if all I had was the score. Shows what I know - and yet another
good reason not to assume I know what I'm talking about.

> 1.e4 e6 2.Nc3 d5 3.Nf3 Bb4 4.a3 Be7 5.d4 dxe4 6.Nxe4 Nd7 7.Bd3 Ngf6
> 8.0-0 Nxe4 9.Bxe4 Nf6 10.Bd3 c5 11.Be3 Qc7 12.Qe2 0-0 13.dxc5 Bxc5
> 14.Bg5 Nd5 15.g3 f6 16.Bd2 Rd8 17.c4 Ne7 18.b4 Bd4 19.Nxd4 Rxd4 20.Bc3
> Rd8 21.f4 Ng6 22.Rac1 Nf8 23.Be4 Bd7 24.Qf3 Bc6 25.Bxc6 bxc6 26.Rcd1
> Rxd1 27.Rxd1 Rd8 28.Rd3 a6 29.Qd1 Rxd3 30.Qxd3 Qd7 31.Qd4 Kf7 32.Kf2
> Qxd4+ 33.Bxd4 Nd7 34.Kf3 e5 35.fxe5 fxe5 36.Ba7 Ke7 37.a5 Kd6 38.b5
> cxb5 39.cxb5 axb5 40.axb5 Kd5 41.Be3 Nf6 42.g4 Ne8 43.g5 g6 44.Bf2 Nd6
> 45.b6 Kc6 46.h4 Kd5 =


 
Date: 20 Jul 2005 21:13:17
From: Ron
Subject: Re: Please analyze my game

Take all my comments with a rather large grain of salt. I haven't had
much success against experts, myself.

> A rather dull game, but interesting for me because my opponent, 438
> rating points above me and an IM, is the strongest player I've ever
> drawn with. No doubt the IM was having a bad day, as he also drew with
> an expert in the previous round. I had White.
>
> 1.e4 e6 2.Nc3 d5 3.Nf3 Bb4 4.a3 Be7

I think 4.a3 is passing up a chance for an advantage with 4.e5 c5 (Bxc3
gives you a tempo-up winawer) 5.Ne2 with c3 and d4 coming. Exploit the
fact that that there really isn't a pin yet.

> 5.d4 dxe4 6.Nxe4 Nd7 7.Bd3 Ngf6
> 8.0-0 Nxe4

I'm not crazy about giving black this exchange for free. Since he has
fewer pieces and is more conjested, I suspect you're better off leaving
more pieces on the board.

> 9.Bxe4 Nf6 10.Bd3 c5 11.Be3 Qc7

This seems like a very passive way for you to reinforce the pawn. 11.
c3 avoids tying your bishop down to passive defense. But bear in mind
that black isn't really threatening to win a pawn here: 11. Bf4 (more
aggresive) cxd4 12.Nxd4 Qxd4?? Bb5+ wins the queen.

> 12.Qe2 0-0

Grabbing e5 with the knight while you can is worth considering.

> 13.dxc5 Bxc5

I'm going to confess to not really understanding the point of your 13th
move. That doesn't mean there isn't one, of course, but surrendering
your center and improving the position of black's bishop doesn't feel
right to me.

> 14.Bg5 Nd5 15.g3 f6

Another move by you that I don't understand. I'd have consider Qe4, the
idea being that either ...f4 or ...g6 gives you weaknesses to attack.
Barring that, I'd have looked to improve the positions of your rooks.

> 16.Bd2 Rd8 17.c4 Ne7 18.b4 Bd4 19.Nxd4 Rxd4 20.Bc3
> Rd8 21.f4 Ng6

I'm not quiet sure I understand your plan here. Rad1 (improving your
development - your rook is doing nothing for you here!) followed by Qh5
(prodding black to create more kingside holes) seems more logical than
weakening your own kingside here. Now your own king position is a little
airy.

> 22.Rac1 Nf8 23.Be4 Bd7 24.Qf3 Bc6 25.Bxc6 bxc6

Maybe you're patting yourself on the back here for the isolated pawns
on the queenside, I feel like you should have been able to play more
energetically and get more.

> 26.Rcd1
> Rxd1 27.Rxd1 Rd8 28.Rd3 a6 29.Qd1 Rxd3 30.Qxd3 Qd7 31.Qd4 Kf7 32.Kf2
> Qxd4+ 33.Bxd4 Nd7 34.Kf3

I believe - perhaps erroneously - that you've got a slightly
advantageous endgame here because you have a bishop in a position with
pawns on both sides of the board against a knight. A queenside pawn
majority is also usually considered a slight advantage in this sort of
position - it's more work for the black king to stop your extra pawn
than it is for yours to stop his.

> e5 35.fxe5 fxe5

Keeping a pawn on f4 seems valuable here, because it keeps the knight
off the valuable central square e5. By trading you run the risk of of an
eventual Ne5. I would have played 35.Be3 and then, on fxe5 gxf4
(although I also would have considered Kxf4, improving my king position.
By trading yourself you miss the chance to improve your king position or
keep your iron-clad grip on e5. If his knight gets to a good central
square, it can be as powerful as your bishop.

Now black gets a dangerous passed pawn without having to work for it,
and you've got to carefully keep it under lock and key.

> 36.Ba7 Ke7

36. Be3, keeping an eye on the kingside as well as the queenside, and
preparing to blockade the pawn, looks superior to my patzer eyes. So
does 36.Bc3, keeping pressure on the pawn, which you'd like to win! If
you can win that pawn, you've got an easily won game.

> 37.a5 Kd6

I'm going to assume you mean 37.a4 here, since a5 is an illegal move
and you later play axd5. This isn't a horrible idea - sooner or later
you're going to have to play it. But I'd improve the position of my K
first with 37.Ke4 (Nf6 38. Kf5 Kd6? 39. Bc5+ wins the pawn, so e4 is
forced, and just like that the knight it tied to the defense of the
pawn.)

The point is that you can make the qside pawn break whenever you want,
so you might as well get your king in the best possible position first.

> 38.b5
> cxb5 39.cxb5 axb5 40.axb5 Kd5
> 41.Be3 Nf6 42.g4 Ne8

On further analysis, I think that once the black king gets to d5, you
can't win, which makes 37.Ke4 your last chance. Now black can use his
king, N, and pawn to create a blockade, keeping your king back while
keeping an eye on the pawn. King activity is crucial in endgames.

> 43.g5 g6
> 44.Bf2 Nd6
> 45.b6 Kc6 46.h4 Kd5 =

No warrantees expressed or implied in the accuracy of this analysis. I
make plenty of mistakes in my own games, so I'm pretty much guaranteed
to make them in yours. :)

-Ron


  
Date: 09 Aug 2005 18:09:35
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: Please analyze my game
Ron <[email protected] > wrote:
>> 37.a5 Kd6
>
> I'm going to assume you mean 37.a4 here, since a5 is an illegal move
> and you later play axd5.

I'm going to assume you mean axb5 here, since axd5 is an illegal move and
he later plays b6. :-)


Dave.

--
David Richerby Radioactive Sadistic Smokes (TM):
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ it's like a pack of cigarettes but it
wants to hurt you and it'll make you
glow in the dark!