| |
Main
Date: 24 Oct 2006 07:24:05
From: Matt Nemmers
Subject: Game of mine
|
Haven't posted a game here in a while so I thought I'd toss this one at
y'all to get some feedback. It's an older game of mine, but not too
awful terrible. My rating shows in this, anyway.
Matt Nemmers (1617) - Bob Long (1800) [C17]
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 c5 5.Nf3 Nc6 6.Bb5 Nge7 7.0-0 Qa5
8.Bxc6+ Nxc6 9.Ne2 cxd4 10.Nexd4 Qd8 11.c3 Be7 12.Qe2 a6 13.Bd2 13.Bf4
Qb6 14.Bg5 Bxg5 15.Nxc6 Bh6 16.Ncd4 0-0 17.Rfd1 Bd7 18.Rab1 Rac8 19.h3
f6 20.Kh1 Be8 21.Nh2 Bg6 22.Ra1 fxe5 23.Qxe5 Rxf2 24.Ng4 Rxb2 25.Nxe6
Kf7 26.Rf1+ Ke7 27.Nc5+ Resigns 1-0
Here's my own analysis of it:
1.e4 e6 The French. Or, as some over-zealous Americans might now call
it, "The Freedom Defense."
2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 c5 5.Nf3 Bob doesn't like this move, but I'm not
convinced it's too bad.
5...Nc6 6.Bb5 Nge7 7.0-0 Qa5 8.Bxc6+ Nxc6 9.Ne2 Passive, but black is
seriously undermining my center pawns and I thought this was the best
way to deal with the threats. After I play c3, one of my knights will
have a good home on d4.
9...cxd4 10.Nexd4 Qd8 11.c3 Be7 12.Qe2 Here I didn't have a clear plan.
I just wanted to get my queen to the e-file so if black plays ...f6 to
open up the f-file for his rook I can undermine his e-pawn.
12...a6 13.Bd2 13.Bf4 might be better here, but again, I had almost no
idea what to do at this point.
13...Qb6 I thought I was slightly better here because black has now
moved his queen three times and his light-squared bishop is on lock
down, while I've castled and my knights are on their best offensive and
defensive squares. His threat to win the b-pawn is easily parried and I
knew I needed to trade off my worthless bishop for his good one, but I
go about it all wrong.
14.Bg5? Bad. Very bad. This awful move allows black to win a pawn.
14...Bxg5 Black has to take with the knight first (threatening my
queen) if he wants that pawn. [14...Nxd4 15.cxd4 Bxg5 16.Nxg5 Qxd4 ]
15.Nxc6 Bh6 16.Ncd4 Whew! That was a close one. Now I'm right back to
where I want to be.
16...0-0 17.Rfd1 I thought the d-file might eventually open up -- and I
wanted to avoid trading my good knight for black's bad bishop after the
maneuver ...Bd7 and ...Bb5 -- so I thought it would be a good idea to
take control of the half-open file. Though I may have moved the wrong
rook since the play is all on the kingside, black's pawns and bishop
are pointing at my queenside and I didn't want to start dropping pawns
over there.
17...Bd7 18.Rab1 Rac8 19.h3 I want to get my other knight more actively
placed on g4. And besides, giving your king a little breathing room is
always a good idea to avoid those pesky back-rank mates. I had
considered (albeit briefly) playing 19.g4, threatening to win his
bishop by 20.g5, but after 19...g6 and 20...Bg7, my e-pawn will have to
go because I don't have the time or resources to defend it.
19...f6 20.Kh1 I want to eventually push my f-pawn to defend his cohort
on the e-file, but I wanted to avoid the nasty pin on my knight by her
majesty on b6.
20...Be8 21.Nh2 Bg6 22.Ra1 I didn't like having to do this.
22...fxe5 23.Qxe5 Rxf2?! I thought this was a bit too greedy, but
nevertheless, this is the critical point of the game -- where accuracy
is absolutely essential. Both of us have threats and I wasn't sure
either of us could carry out our plans without taking a tempo or two
for defense, but now my knight springs back into the game after a brief
hiatus on h2. [After >=23...Rce8 24.Ng4 Bf4-/+ black clearly has the
upper hand.]
24.Ng4+/= I was really happy to get my knight back into the fracas, but
24...Bf4 had me worried.
24...Rxb2?? GM Jonathan Rowson might call this "blinking." Black
relinqueshes control of the only open file to snatch a pawn on the side
of the board where nothing is happening or needs to happen. The play is
all on the kingside. [Instead, if >=24...Rf7 25.Qxe6 Qxe6 26.Nxe6 Re8
27.Nxh6+ gxh6= it's anybody's game.]
25.Nxe6+- I had seriously considered taking with the queen (with
check), but I wanted to get material back by grabbing his d-pawn,
simultaneously threatening a discovered check. Glad I didn't! Little
did I realize that after Nxe6 white has almost a forced win. Black
doesn't have sufficient time (or piece placement) to prevent Nxh6+
followed by Qg7 mate, so he's forced to take drastic measures.
Sometimes God grants little favors.....
25...Kf7 26.Rf1+ This is why taking the rook off the f-file was bad.
26...Ke7 27.Nc5+ And here black resigned in view of 27...Kd8 28.Rf8+
Be8 29.Rxe8#, or the even less attractive alternative 27...Qe6 28.Qxe6+
Kd8 29.Qe7#. 1-0
As usual, all comments and flame-sprays welcome.
|
|
| |
Date: 25 Oct 2006 03:28:09
From: Matt Nemmers
Subject: Re: Game of mine
|
Ray Gordon, creator of the "pivot" wrote:
> >> Maybe it was. I don't post my A stuff now because I don't want to tip
> >> off
> >> anyone to what I'm playing.
> >
> > What difference does it make? You're anonymous online and don't play
> > OTB anyway.
>
> Who says I don't plan to play OTB chess?
>
> There's a reason they call it TRAINING.
>
> This country asks for fulltime players, it should not complain when one
> shows up.
So you've been training now for...what? 16 years? You should be World
Champ by now with that training regime, Gordo. But guess what? You're
not.
Plans don't get results; playing does. So, until you actually play a
rated game, you're nothing but a shit-talker with nothing -- NOTHING --
to back it up.
And BTW, nobody asked for "fulltime players." I'd ask you to let us
know when one arrives, but not being one yourself, you could hardly
know how to identify them.
|
| | |
Date: 25 Oct 2006 17:37:10
From: Ray Gordon, creator of the \pivot\
Subject: Re: Game of mine
|
>> Who says I don't plan to play OTB chess?
>>
>> There's a reason they call it TRAINING.
>>
>> This country asks for fulltime players, it should not complain when one
>> shows up.
>
> So you've been training now for...what? 16 years?
Two since my return, four before I quit.
Six total.
--
Money is not "game."
Looks are not "game."
Social status or value is not "game."
Those are the things that game makes unnecessary.
A seduction guru who teaches you that looks, money or status is game is not
teaching you "game," but how to be an AFC. He uses his students' money to
get women and laughs that "AFCs pay my rent."
|
| |
Date: 25 Oct 2006 02:16:46
From: Matt Nemmers
Subject: Re: Game of mine
|
Ray Gordon, creator of the "pivot" wrote:
> >> Wow, the pathetic, jealous, big-mouth-with-nothing-to-back-it-up FOOL is
> >> only 283 points below my OLD rating.
> >
> > Ray, this game was far more impressive than the one you recently posted.
>
> Maybe it was. I don't post my A stuff now because I don't want to tip off
> anyone to what I'm playing.
What difference does it make? You're anonymous online and don't play
OTB anyway. That, on top of the FACT that nobody gives a shit what you
play, makes the above self-important rek even more ridiculous than
it is at face value.
> I also play one-minute chess, not "retard" chess.
I don't even have a response to this ridiculous statement.
> I'll check that game again at some point to see what I thought I saw during
> the game.
Yeah, Gordo....we're all on pins and needles about the next game you'll
post in which you "almost didn't lose" to some high-rated internet
player at one-minute ("non-retard") chess.
|
| | |
Date: 25 Oct 2006 06:14:17
From: Ray Gordon, creator of the \pivot\
Subject: Re: Game of mine
|
>> Maybe it was. I don't post my A stuff now because I don't want to tip
>> off
>> anyone to what I'm playing.
>
> What difference does it make? You're anonymous online and don't play
> OTB anyway.
Who says I don't plan to play OTB chess?
There's a reason they call it TRAINING.
This country asks for fulltime players, it should not complain when one
shows up.
--
Money is not "game."
Looks are not "game."
Social status or value is not "game."
Those are the things that game makes unnecessary.
A seduction guru who teaches you that looks, money or status is game is not
teaching you "game," but how to be an AFC. He uses his students' money to
get women and laughs that "AFCs pay my rent."
|
| | | |
Date: 27 Oct 2006 16:28:54
From: Antonio Torrecillas
Subject: Re: Game of mine
|
En/na Ray Gordon, creator of the "pivot" ha escrit:
> Who says I don't plan to play OTB chess?
Your comments!!
:-)
One of two: or you do not play OTB chess or you do not learn anything
from those games.
AT
|
| |
Date: 24 Oct 2006 21:21:59
From: Matt Nemmers
Subject: Re: Game of mine
|
Ray Gordon, creator of the "pivot" wrote:
> > (1617)
>
> Wow, the pathetic, jealous, big-mouth-with-nothing-to-back-it-up FOOL is
> only 283 points below my OLD rating.
>
> <snicker>
LMAO. Ray will now act as if my middle-class rating is just now
becoming public knowledge. As if I've been bashing his skills whilst
promoting my own. Not so.
But let him think I'm jealous of his big, bad, 16-year old Class A
rating. Let him think we all are. Let him believe in his heart of
hearts that we're all jealous of his skills at bullet chess, his skills
at "seducing women," and shit, even his skills with a bow-staff.
(Chicks only like guys with lots of skills, ya know.) Let him think
all that. It's the only satisfaction this sad, pathetic little boy
gets. And since he can somehow justify living with his mommy at 40+
years of age, well...I guess we all don't need to feel too awful bad
about letting him think we're jealous of him now, do we?
:)
|
| |
Ray Gordon, creator of the "pivot" wrote:
> >> I also play one-minute chess, not "retard" chess.
> >
> > you play games that you don't allow the opponent to think...
> > I believe your type of chess is closer to retart chess.
>
> Does the NFL give players time to think? Is the NBA shot clock three
> minutes?
>
> Speed is part of every professional sport, and IQ test.
>
> > As a matter of fact you are too scared to play real
> > chess. too scared of 'cheaters'
>
> Scared? Cheating is a reality in modern chess. Quick time controls are the
> cure for that. Let there be some real security measures in place before I
> return to slow chess.
>
>
> > Of course you will bluster along stating how wonderful
> > you are... threatening to sue everyone while we all
> > know its because you lack any form of self esteem
> > because you have accomplished nothing in your life.
> > That is not surprising from someone still living with
> > his mom at your age...
>
> What preconceived notions must this man have about someone choosing to live
> with his family? Maybe he gets his values from TV sitcoms or golddigging
> whores.
>
> He should look up Angelina Jolie's quote about men who think they're a
> success just because they have money.
>
> --
> Money is not "game."
> Looks are not "game."
> Social status or value is not "game."
> Those are the things that game makes unnecessary.
>
> A seduction guru who teaches you that looks, money or status is game is not
> teaching you "game," but how to be an AFC. He uses his students' money to
> get women and laughs that "AFCs pay my rent."
Hey Ray, post one of your OTB games if you are worried about cheating.
No comps there...
Who are you afraid of?
http://chess-training.blogspot.com
|
| | |
Date: 24 Oct 2006 19:58:01
From: Ray Gordon, creator of the \pivot\
Subject: Re: Game of mine
|
> Hey Ray, post one of your OTB games if you are worried about cheating.
> No comps there...
Just toilets.
>
> Who are you afraid of?
Look up Parker-Volovich in the August 1990 Chess Life, Larry Evans' column.
One of the best openings I ever played, against a 2508 player in the first
round.
That I didn't finish him off was actually why I quit training.
--
Money is not "game."
Looks are not "game."
Social status or value is not "game."
Those are the things that game makes unnecessary.
A seduction guru who teaches you that looks, money or status is game is not
teaching you "game," but how to be an AFC. He uses his students' money to
get women and laughs that "AFCs pay my rent."
|
| |
Date: 24 Oct 2006 12:50:53
From: Inconnux
Subject: Re: Game of mine
|
> I also play one-minute chess, not "retard" chess.
you play games that you don't allow the opponent to think...
I believe your type of chess is closer to retart chess.
As a matter of fact you are too scared to play real
chess. too scared of 'cheaters'
Of course you will bluster along stating how wonderful
you are... threatening to sue everyone while we all
know its because you lack any form of self esteem
because you have accomplished nothing in your life.
That is not surprising from someone still living with
his mom at your age...
|
| | |
Date: 24 Oct 2006 16:47:35
From: Ray Gordon, creator of the \pivot\
Subject: Re: Game of mine
|
>> I also play one-minute chess, not "retard" chess.
>
> you play games that you don't allow the opponent to think...
> I believe your type of chess is closer to retart chess.
Does the NFL give players time to think? Is the NBA shot clock three
minutes?
Speed is part of every professional sport, and IQ test.
> As a matter of fact you are too scared to play real
> chess. too scared of 'cheaters'
Scared? Cheating is a reality in modern chess. Quick time controls are the
cure for that. Let there be some real security measures in place before I
return to slow chess.
> Of course you will bluster along stating how wonderful
> you are... threatening to sue everyone while we all
> know its because you lack any form of self esteem
> because you have accomplished nothing in your life.
> That is not surprising from someone still living with
> his mom at your age...
What preconceived notions must this man have about someone choosing to live
with his family? Maybe he gets his values from TV sitcoms or golddigging
whores.
He should look up Angelina Jolie's quote about men who think they're a
success just because they have money.
--
Money is not "game."
Looks are not "game."
Social status or value is not "game."
Those are the things that game makes unnecessary.
A seduction guru who teaches you that looks, money or status is game is not
teaching you "game," but how to be an AFC. He uses his students' money to
get women and laughs that "AFCs pay my rent."
|
| | | |
Date: 24 Oct 2006 23:19:50
From: Patrick Volk
Subject: Re: Game of mine
|
On Tue, 24 Oct 2006 16:47:35 -0400, "Ray Gordon, creator of the
\"pivot\"" <[email protected] > wrote:
>>> I also play one-minute chess, not "retard" chess.
>>
>> you play games that you don't allow the opponent to think...
>> I believe your type of chess is closer to retart chess.
>
>Does the NFL give players time to think? Is the NBA shot clock three
>minutes?
>
>Speed is part of every professional sport, and IQ test.
That's why the 1-minute versions of the NFL, NBA and NASCAR are sooo
popular, and regarded as a *true* measure of a team's skill.
>
>> As a matter of fact you are too scared to play real
>> chess. too scared of 'cheaters'
>
>Scared? Cheating is a reality in modern chess. Quick time controls are the
>cure for that. Let there be some real security measures in place before I
>return to slow chess.
..... Occham's Razor comes to mind
>
>
>> Of course you will bluster along stating how wonderful
>> you are... threatening to sue everyone while we all
>> know its because you lack any form of self esteem
>> because you have accomplished nothing in your life.
>> That is not surprising from someone still living with
>> his mom at your age...
>
>What preconceived notions must this man have about someone choosing to live
>with his family? Maybe he gets his values from TV sitcoms or golddigging
>whores.
>
>He should look up Angelina Jolie's quote about men who think they're a
>success just because they have money.
I also don't think you'll be successful going the Bobby Fischer route.
You kind of strike me as a EE with no formal
training-turned-programmer. You walk on water, know everything. You
know too much to be told anything... All you know is you way
eventually works.
I make pretty good money cleaning up after those people. Especially
when they inevitably get in a situation where their way doesn't work.
A complex problem where faking it no longer works. They can quote
chapter and verse from Stroustup, K&R, or Grady Booch, but they don't
truly comprehend. They have not attained enlightenment.
|
| |
Date: 24 Oct 2006 12:30:56
From: Inconnux
Subject: Re: Game of mine
|
Ray Gordon, creator of the "pivot" wrote:
> > (1617)
>
> Wow, the pathetic, jealous, big-mouth-with-nothing-to-back-it-up FOOL is
> only 283 points below my OLD rating.
>
> <snicker>
"A player rated 2000 in my playing days is roughly equal to a 1600-1700
player today."
http://www.cybersheet.com/chess.html
In your own words...
so what you are really saying is that he is now equal to your PEAK
rating. and
who is the FOOL???
<snicker >
|
| | |
Date: 24 Oct 2006 15:33:45
From: Ray Gordon, creator of the \pivot\
Subject: Re: Game of mine
|
> Ray Gordon, creator of the "pivot" wrote:
>> > (1617)
>>
>> Wow, the pathetic, jealous, big-mouth-with-nothing-to-back-it-up FOOL is
>> only 283 points below my OLD rating.
>>
>> <snicker>
>
> "A player rated 2000 in my playing days is roughly equal to a 1600-1700
> player today."
> http://www.cybersheet.com/chess.html
>
> In your own words...
>
> so what you are really saying is that he is now equal to your PEAK
> rating. and
> who is the FOOL???
I did it in the pre-computer era, FOOL.
--
Money is not "game."
Looks are not "game."
Social status or value is not "game."
Those are the things that game makes unnecessary.
A seduction guru who teaches you that looks, money or status is game is not
teaching you "game," but how to be an AFC. He uses his students' money to
get women and laughs that "AFCs pay my rent."
|
| |
Date: 24 Oct 2006 14:19:59
From: Ray Gordon, creator of the \pivot\
Subject: Re: Game of mine
|
> (1617)
Wow, the pathetic, jealous, big-mouth-with-nothing-to-back-it-up FOOL is
only 283 points below my OLD rating.
<snicker >
--
Money is not "game."
Looks are not "game."
Social status or value is not "game."
Those are the things that game makes unnecessary.
A seduction guru who teaches you that looks, money or status is game is not
teaching you "game," but how to be an AFC. He uses his students' money to
get women and laughs that "AFCs pay my rent."
|
| | |
Date: 24 Oct 2006 19:34:46
From: Ron
Subject: Re: Game of mine
|
In article <[email protected] >,
"Ray Gordon, creator of the \"pivot\"" <[email protected] > wrote:
> Wow, the pathetic, jealous, big-mouth-with-nothing-to-back-it-up FOOL is
> only 283 points below my OLD rating.
Ray, this game was far more impressive than the one you recently posted.
And, to his credit, his didn't make any bogus claims about having
nonexistent breakthroughs "all figured out."
-Ron
|
| | | |
Date: 24 Oct 2006 15:38:40
From: Ray Gordon, creator of the \pivot\
Subject: Re: Game of mine
|
>> Wow, the pathetic, jealous, big-mouth-with-nothing-to-back-it-up FOOL is
>> only 283 points below my OLD rating.
>
> Ray, this game was far more impressive than the one you recently posted.
Maybe it was. I don't post my A stuff now because I don't want to tip off
anyone to what I'm playing.
I also play one-minute chess, not "retard" chess.
I'll check that game again at some point to see what I thought I saw during
the game.
--
Money is not "game."
Looks are not "game."
Social status or value is not "game."
Those are the things that game makes unnecessary.
A seduction guru who teaches you that looks, money or status is game is not
teaching you "game," but how to be an AFC. He uses his students' money to
get women and laughs that "AFCs pay my rent."
|
| | | | |
Date: 25 Oct 2006 20:19:12
From: Neil Schemenauer
Subject: Re: Game of mine
|
Ray Gordon, creator of the "pivot" <[email protected] > wrote:
> I don't post my A stuff now because I don't want to tip off anyone
> to what I'm playing.
Hilarious.
|
|
