This next tournament game, which started my win streak, recalls a number of previous themes from
my analyzed games. The problem of going ahead and playing an "obvious move" without checking tactics is present - for both White and Black, in this case. Strategic themes are identified on the kingside (White's Bh6 threat), the center (the e5 square and various tactics, as well as an eventual pawn break), and the queenside (missed opportunities to exploit White's weaknesses there). Tactical themes include hanging pieces (White's Bf4), deflection, and intermediate moves (exploited by me to very good effect).
Overall I chose as the primary theme the sometimes cliche' comment in a game annotation, that the win from a certain point is "a matter of technique". As long as one's technique is adequate, that is. One of the
pitfalls of computer analysis is to always look for the best move, even when you have already identified a winning move, which from a practical perspective should (by definition) always be enough. This is an especially important consideration after a long struggle when you may be tired and your board sight and calculating ability (unlike a computer engine's) is not at 100%. In this game I won by going into an advantageous endgame which I felt confident of winning, but should have earlier seen a deflection tactic (25...h5!) which would have wrapped things up much sooner. After that, it really is around move 36 that I knew I would win (rather than just thinking it...there is a difference), but still almost faltered due to a board sight issue on the long diagonal. The final blow doesn't come until I transition into a won king and pawn endgame, which takes two tries but finally succeeds.
This game was a struggle and I missed some good ideas, but being able to make some strong, confident decisions along the way to victory helped keep up the positive momentum in subsequent games.
Replay and check the LiveBook here |
Please, wait...
1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.Bf4 Bg4 6.Be2 Nf6 7.h3 Bh5 8.c3 e6 9.Nbd2 Bd6 10.Ne5 Bxe2 11.Qxe2 0-0 12.Ndf3 Ne4 13.Nxc6 bxc6 14.Ne5?! 14.Bxd6 Nxd6 15.0-0= 14...Qc7 15.Qg4 15.Bh2!? 15...c5 15...f6 16.Nd3 e5 17.dxe5 fxe5 18.Be3 c5 15...Rab8 16.f3? 16.Bh6? Bxe5 17.dxe5 Qxe5 16.0-0 Rab8 16...cxd4! 17.cxd4 17.fxe4 Bxe5 18.Bxe5 Qxe5 19.cxd4 Qxd4-+ 17...Bb4+ 17...Qa5+ 18.Kf1 18.Ke2 Bxe5 19.fxe4 f5 20.exf5 Bxf4 21.Qxf4 Rxf5 18...Qb5+ 19.Kg1 Qxb2 20.Kh2 Nf2-+ 18.Kf1 Nd2+?! 18...Nf6 19.Qh4 Rac8 19.Kg1 19.Bxd2? Bxd2-+ 19...Rfe8?! 19...Rfc8 20.Bh6 f5 21.Qg3 Nc4= 19...Nc4 20.a3? 20.Nd3 Qc4 21.Nxb4 Qxd4+ 22.Kh2 Qxb4 23.b3± 20...Nb3 21.Rd1 Bd6 22.Kh2 22.Nd3!? Rac8 23.Be5 Bxe5 24.dxe5 Qb6+ 25.Kh2 Rc2 22...f6 23.Nd3 Nxd4 24.Bxd6 Qxd6+ 25.Nf4? 25.f4 25...Ne2 25...h5! 26.g3 Nxf4 27.gxf4 Rac8-+ 28.Rc1 Rc7 29.Rhe1 Rce7 29...Rxc1 30.Kh1 e5 31.fxe5 Rxe5 32.Rxe5 Qxe5 33.b4 Qe3 33...f5 34.Rg1 34.Rc7!? g5 35.Rc8 Kg7 36.Rxe8 Qxe8 34...g6 35.Rf1 f5 36.Qg2 Qxa3 37.f4 Kg7 38.Rb1 38.Qxd5 Qxh3+ 38...Re3 39.Qb2+ Rc3 40.Qxa3 Rxa3 41.Kg2 Ra6 42.b5 Rd6 43.Ra1 Rd7 44.Kf3 d4 45.Ke2 Kf7 45...Kh6 46.Ra6 Ke8 47.b6 axb6 48.Rxb6 d3+ 49.Kd2 Kf7 50.Rb3 h6 51.Rxd3 51.Rb5-+ 51...Rxd3+ 52.Kxd3 g5 53.fxg5 hxg5 54.Ke3 Kg6 55.Kf3 Kh5 55...Kf6 56.Kg3 f4+ 57.Kf3 Kh4 58.Kg2 Kh5 59.Kf3 Kh4 60.Kg2 f3+ 61.Kh2 g4 62.hxg4 Kxg4 63.Kh1 Kh3 64.Kg1 Kg3 65.Kh1 Kf2 66.Kh2 Ke1 67.Kg1 f2+ 0–1
- 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.
Class C | - | ChessAdmin | - | 0–1 | B13 | |
Please, wait...
Nice post, I was wondering what was the elos of the players?
ReplyDeleteI'm a Class B (USCF) player. My opponent (as noted) was Class C, but was a junior and I'd say played a bit stronger than his rating (which is typical).
Delete