This second-round game followed
Annotated Game #24 and was against a Class D player. The opening started off in an irregular fashion on move 4 with ..Bd6, although White cannot usually immediately punish these types of positional errors in the English. In this case it led to a loss of tempo by Black, which White could have exploited better on move 8 with more active play; this was one of the useful points found in analysis that will help inform my future play. White also could have played more actively on move 10, seizing the outpost on d5 for his knight, which is a key theme in the English.
My opponent goes astray with moves 10 and 11, where he evidently thought he could get in the central break ..d5. A tactical point instead allows White to win a piece and then work on consolidating his advantage. In Class-level games, however, a piece advantage in and of itself is not an automatic win, especially if there is no glaring weakness in the position of the player who is down material. This point was made in Dan Heisman's ChessCafe article
"When You're Winning, It's a Whole Different Game". By coincidence, I happened to read this just before analyzing the game, which illustrates the point nicely - I missed at least one neat way to wrap up the game (see move 31) and on move 32 missed a pinning tactic that gave back the piece. Luckily when the dust cleared I was still up two pawns in a winning endgame and went on to convert the point with careful play.
The overall lesson here is to not put the brain on automatic in the opening (instead look for more active play and to exploit opportunities, even in familiar setups), nor when winning and up material where there is still play left in the position.
Replay and check the LiveBook here |
Please, wait...
1.c4 e5 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.g3 Nf6 4.Bg2 Bd6N 5.d3 h6 6.Nf3 0-0 7.0-0 Bc5 8.Nd2 8.Nxe5 Nxe5 9.d4 Bxd4 10.Qxd4 8...d6= 9.Nde4 Bb6 9...Nxe4 10.Nxe4 Bb6 10.Rb1 10.Nxf6+ Qxf6 11.Nd5 10...Nb4 11.a3 d5?? 11...Nxe4 12.Nxe4 Nc6 12.Nxf6+ Qxf6 13.axb4 a5 14.Nxd5 Qd8 15.c5 15.Nxb6 cxb6 16.Bd2 15...Ba7 16.bxa5 Bxc5 17.b4 Bd6 18.Be3 Ra6 19.Qc2 c6 20.Nb6 Bf5 21.Bc5 g6 22.Rfc1 22.b5 Rxa5 23.Nc4 23.Bxd6 Qxd6 24.Nc4 Qc5 23...Bxc5 24.Nxa5 Qxa5 25.Qxc5 22...Be6 23.Nc4 Bxc5 24.bxc5 Qc7 24...Bxc4 25.Nd6 Rb8 26.Qc3 Rxa5 27.Rxb7 27.Bxc6 27...Rxb7 28.Nxb7 Rb5 29.Nd6 Rb8 30.Qxe5 Qa5 31.Nc4 31.Nxf7! Kxf7 32.Qxb8 31...Qb5 32.Nb6?? 32.Bxc6 Qb4 33.Nd6+- 32...Rxb6 33.Be4 33.cxb6 Qxe5 33...Qb2 34.Qxb2 Rxb2 35.Bxc6 Rxe2 36.Be4 f5 37.Kf1 Rd2 38.Ke1 Rb2 39.Bg2 Kf8 40.d4 Ke8 41.d5 Bc8 42.Rd1 42.d6 Kd8 43.c6 Ra2+- 44.Rb1 42...Kd7 42...Ba6 43.Bf3+- Rb3 43.d6 Bb7 44.c6+! Bxc6 45.Bxc6+ Kd8 45...Kxc6 46.d7 Rb8 47.d8Q 46.Ra1 Rb8 47.Kd2 Rc8 48.Ra6 g5 49.Ke3 h5 50.Kd4 h4 51.Ke5 hxg3 52.hxg3 f4 53.gxf4 53.Ke6 f3 54.Bd7 Rb8 55.Ra5 g4 56.Rh5 Rb1 57.Rh8# 53...g4 54.f5 Rb8 55.Ke6 g3 56.fxg3 56.Ra7 gxf2 57.Rg7 f1Q 58.Rg8# 56...Rc8 57.Ra8 Rxa8 58.Bxa8 Ke8 59.d7+ Kd8 60.f6 60.f6 Kc7 61.f7 Kb6 62.d8Q+ Kb5 63.f8Q Kc4 64.Qd5+ Kc3 65.Qa3+ Kc2 66.Qdd3# 1–0
- Start an analysis engine:
- Try maximizing the board:
- Use the four cursor keys to replay the game. Make moves to analyse yourself.
- Press Ctrl-B to rotate the board.
- Drag the split bars between window panes.
- Download&Clip PGN/GIF/FEN/QR Codes. Share the game.
- Games viewed here will automatically be stored in your cloud clipboard (if you are logged in). Use the cloud clipboard also in ChessBase.
- Create an account to access the games cloud.
ChessAdmin | - | Class D | - | 1–0 | A25 | |
Please, wait...
Thanks for the link to the Heisman article, it was good to be reminded of this, though I have gotten pretty good at winning the won game--through hard experience of not winning them!
ReplyDeleteI do disagree a little with something he seems to be saying--when ahead in material by a piece or more it's often best to use the extra force to just win more and more material. Of course every position is different, but often finding a target and winning it is actually "safer" than just sitting on your hands, because going too defensive can actually let him maximize his piece activity. Overall, though, Heisman's idea of taking your time and not trying to win in the fewest moves through complications is a very sound one.
There is a little bit of apparent contradiction in the article, where he advises both to play actively and think "safety first." They're actually not mutually contradictory if someone is playing correctly, although our emotional minds may have trouble reconciling the two. I think his main point is that his target audience is much more likely to get excited about winning and then drop their extra material (or worse), rather than be able to convert without active focus on safety.
ReplyDeleteOn a related note, this reminds me of the practical fact that once you've found an ironclad winning strategy, it's not necessary or most often desirable to look for another way to play, although of course one shouldn't pass up easy mates.