chess against computer

Chess Against Computer

Share and you will reveal!
Funky name, real interests
[ Sign up | Log in | Guest ] (beta)
zoobrenok 86 ( +1 | -1 )
Another unfortunate draw... For most of the game I was sure I am going to win, but then I let black queen out and it became "3-move" rule draw.

Any feedback would be appreciated. This time even for oppening :-) because I am not that good with this particular oppening and lost most of the games where I started King's Gambit as white (or when it was played against me when I had black).

Comment from brunetti IS REQUIRED :-)

board #440888

Here is PGN:
1. e4 e5
2. f4 exf4
3. Nf3 b6
4. Bc4 Bc5
5. d4 Be7
6. O-O g5
7. Nc3 Bb7
8. Ne5 d5
9. Nxd5 Nh6
10. Qh5 Bf8
11. g3 Nd7
12. gxf4 c6
13. Ne3 gxf4
14. Rxf4 Rg8+
15. Kh1 Nxe5
16. dxe5 Rg6
17. e6 fxe6
18. Bxe6 Qd6
19. Rf6 Qd4
20. Rxg6 hxg6
21. Qxg6+ Kd8
22. Qg5+ Kc7
23. Qg3+ Kd8
24. Qh4+ Kc7
25. Nf5 Qd1+
26. Kg2 Qe2+
27. Kh3 Qf1+
28. Kg3 Nxf5+
29. exf5 Qg1+
30. Kh3 Qf1+
31. Kg4 Qe2+
32. Kg3 Qe1+
33. Kh3 Qf1+
34. Kg3 Qe1+
35. Kh3 Qf1+
caldazar 259 ( +1 | -1 )
I'm nowhere near as skilled as brunetti, but... My $0.02:

1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 b6

Hmmm... can Black really get away with something slow like this in the King's Gambit?

4. Bc4 Bc5

Allowing White to play d4 with a gain of time.

5. d4 Be7

Black has lost two tempi already, and in the King's Gambit, this can be fatal.

6. O-O


6. Bxf4 Bb7 7. O-O when material is level but White has superior development and a strong center.

6. Ne5 Nh6 7. Bxf4 Bg5 8. O-O Bxf4 9. Rxf4 with very heavy pressure on f7.

6... g5

...g5 is usually okay for Black when his bishop sits on f8 because the bishop can cover the weakened dark squares and move to g7 or h6 if necessary. Here, with the bishop on e7, ...g5 is a serious error.

7. Nc3

Black's queen is immobile, his development is poor, his king is stuck in the center, and there are numerous weak squares in his kingside. He has no reasonable way to mobilize his forces to defend f7. Therefore, after 7. Ne5 Nh6 8. Qh5, Black loses a piece.

7... Bb7

Better is 7... d6 to prevent Ne5.

8. Ne5


8... d5

There is no satisfactory defense for Black:

8... Nh6 9. Qh5 wins a piece.

8... Ba6 9. Bxa6 Nxa6 10. Qh5 Nh6 11. Qxh6 also wins a piece.

9. Nxd5

Good enough, but even better was 9. Qh5 Nh6 10. exd5 with 11. Qxh6 to follow.

9... Nh6 10. Qh5 Bf8

Relatively best for Black is probably 10... Qd6 although he will likely still suffer heavy material losses after 11. h4 . The simple 10... Qd6 11. Nxc7+ Qxc7 12. Qxh6 is also fine for White.

11. g3

A good idea but 11. Bxf4 is a more forceful way to dispatch Black's kingside pawns and open up the f-file. 11. Bxf4 gxf4 12. Nxf7 Nxf7 13. Rxf4 and Black cannot hold his position together.

11... Nd7 12. gxf4 c6 13. Ne3

Black's threat to the d5-knight is trivial considering White is playing for mate. Better is 13. Nxf7 Nxf7 14. fxg5 and it's hopeless for Black.

13... gxf4

Or 13... Qe7 14. Nxd7 Qxd7 15. fxg5 and White is winning.

14. Rxf4

f7 is attacked three times and defended twice so 14. Bxf7+ Ke7 15. Nf5+ Nxf5 16. Qxf5 Qc8 17. Qg5+ Nf6 18. Rxf4 with a ferocious attack that should be winning.

14... Rg8+ 15. Kh1 Nxe5 16. dxe5 Rg6 17. e6

Attempting to remove a defender of f7 is better with 17. Nf5 Qd7 (17... Nxf5 18. Rxf5 Qd7 is basically the same idea) 18. Nxh6 Rxh6 (18... Bxh6 19. Bxf7+ Qxf7 20. Rxf7 Kxf7 21. Bxh6) 19. Qxf7+ Qxf7 20. Rxf7 and White is threatening both Bxh6 and Rxb7.

17... fxe6 18. Bxe6 Qd6 19. Rf6 Qd4 20. Rxg6 hxg6 21. Qxg6+ Kd8 22. Qg5+ Kc7 23. Qg3+

White requires three pieces along three adjacent diagonals for the checks to be effective, so perhaps 23. Nd5+ cxd5 24. Bf4+ Kc6 25. Bxd5+ Kd7 26. Bxb7 and White has regained his piece, is three pawns up, and still has a strong attack against Black's king.

23... Kd8

Better is 23... Bd6 which stops the harassment.

24. Qh4+ Kc7 25. Nf5

The right idea, but the implementation isn't sufficiently forcing (25. Nd5+).

25... Qd1+

Now White has no way to avoid Black's perpetual checks.

26. Kg2 Qe2+ 27. Kh3 Qf1+ 28. Kg3 Nxf5+ 29. exf5 Qg1+ 30. Kh3 Qf1+ 31. Kg4 Qe2+ 32. Kg3 Qe1+ 33. Kh3 Qf1+ 34. Kg3 Qe1+ 35. Kh3 Qf1+ 1/2-1/2
zoobrenok 71 ( +1 | -1 )
caldazar brunetti is an expert in KG - there was a time when he only played KG as white :-).

But you did very, very good.

If I understand this correctly, then for me (white) this was a game of missed opportunities -- which also explains why I do not think of myself hig as a chess player :(.

I also learned something new -- I never though that taking pawn with your knight or bishop can have such a devastating efforts for an enemy, even if that khight is sacrificed...

I feel a little bit sad about this game - I put all my best and I was not able to materialize it...

But after reading your review I will give another chance to KG :-)
zoobrenok 14 ( +1 | -1 )
caldazar, Part II On a scale of 1 to 10, how did you like:
1. Game itself (not from right/wrong move angle, but from show perspective?)
2. Analyzing the game
caldazar 166 ( +1 | -1 )
Zoobrenok, my comments on your comments I don't think there's anything in particular to be too upset about; overall I think you played well. In general, it looks like you came up with the right ideas in the relevant situations (quick development and immediate attack against a slow defense to the King's Gambit, forcing attacks on the f7-point, attempting to increase the pressure by bringing more pieces to bear against the kingside when your opponent successfully meets your attack). Perhaps the way you implemented your ideas weren't the most forceful and agressive options available at each move, but the basic way you conducted your attack seemed reasonable to me. I don't personally think you were seriously in danger of losing at at point during the game; it seems you always held the advantage (whether slight or large). Once you got your attack going, you never backed down from it. Yes, overlooking your opponent's perpetual check opportunity was a rather serious mistake, but Black was extremely fortunate to barely escape with the draw.

I typically like analyzing King's Gambit games since they're usually the equivalent of long tactical exercises, and practicing calculation is the reason I take the time to analyze other people's games in the first place. As for how "showy" it was, well, I don't know what to say. It was a decent struggle in which you exploited a bit of poor opening play by your opponent to whip up an attack, and then you managed to keep the attack going, never giving your opponent a moment's rest. A good example of how to conduct an attack, all in all (up until the mistake at the end, at any rate). I guess I'll just leave it at that.
goldwarlock 17 ( +1 | -1 )
Will anyone say anything good to me too? Will anyone say anything good to me too?

I also played well, even if I was really BAD in the beginning ;-)

I'm gonna post some comments this evening on my moves.
tulkos 7 ( +1 | -1 )
uhhh--- you held on well---you didn't mind when he missed oppurtunities---;-)