I fared better in my afternoon G/65 at ICC! I won 2..e6 Sicilian with the Black pieces against a slightly higher rated opponent. He went for exchanges early and then I won in the endgame. I missed a few things in the ending but overall I was happy with my play in this endgame. I had a plan and was able to implement it.
First we have the loss:
Now here is the win:
Seeya Tomorrow!!
TommyG, I'll give my two cents based on my experience.
ReplyDeleteInternet chess is mostly good for building up a competitive spirit that one can bring to OTB chess, and it's also great for losing in an opening by falling into every trap imaginable, if that is a way to improve one's chess game, but it's mostly a waste of time, if not still fun and instructive, and it's also a bit addicting.
The database and engine and opening book thing sounds like fun to me and probably most other players, but it's not really going to make you a better player, even if it does improve your feel for an opening and give you some openings miniatures wins.
The way to improve is to throw the engine out the window (yes, they are really good for helping improve one's mating attacks, though), and work things out on one's own.
Studying annotated games is a much better way to sort of pick up one's game prior to a tournament because it might show some things one would miss if they were playing that game.
Tactics and endgame study is probably best. Tactics mostly for the calculating effect, and not because stupid things should be tried in one's OTB rated games, but just to help with calculating and anticipating opponent attacks, and one's own attacks.
The player that calculates better should win a chess game. It's not really openings, tactics, or endgames, it's just whoever is consistently calculating all game long, of better quality, should win the game. ;-)
If you look at my last game (I was in an impatient mood and drew), you will see that my opponent, predictably for his rating, lashed out with e2-e4-e5 and should have lost the game. During the game, I was more worried about e3 and Bd3, which look like the much more normal opening moves!
ReplyDeleteAlso, once he had played Nf3, I was much less worried about this e4 push, because it seemed to have more venom in conjunction with a Qf3 plan. IOW, I felt my opponent was putting together random opening moves and not calculating all that much, which sort of lulled me, but anyway if I had brought my A game this should have been an easy person/position to win against is my point.
First game:
ReplyDeleteNot familiar with this opening but 1. Nf3 2. c4 3. g3 or e3 is a setup I have seen more in practical play then the played 2. b3.
2. b3 isn't bad but already fixes your position somewhat since you have to play your bishop to b2 to fill the gap. While postponing b3 (Nf3 and queen covers d4 if you want to push the d-pawn to there) gives you time to decide how to develop your bishop in answer to your opponents moves.
5. Bb2 is a good move!
Why should you play have to play 5. h3?
Usually if one makes a hole at b2 or g2 the move to follow immediately is the bishop occupying that hole, I agree with that. But in this position d4 is enough covered by the pawn on e3. Dont be so worried by the pin of Bg4, the answer is simple namely Be2.
I do not know for sure but either you have a fixed idea in your head that one may not allow, at no cost, Bg4, or you are seeing threats that doesn't excist.
10. Bc3 playing with an already developed piece for the second time. Your b1 knight is still in the stable. It can defend the check aswell. 10. Nd2 is better then 10. Nc3 since on c3 the knight hampers the Bb2.
12. Bd2 A mistake low rated players often make. There is a big piece on the run and all they think about is attacking it without looking at the rest of the position. All they think about is chasing around this big piece. To stop doing so, when it's your move, always choose three candidate moves before you start analysing. If you have three candidates analyse the three moves and play which one is best according your analyse.
13. c5 ??? Again, first choose atleast three candidate moves ... .
21. ... Kg5??? What is wrong with 21. ... Nxe5?? This way the checks stop and Nhf3 is always checkmate.
Second game I will not comment on, will give you bragging rights. :-)
Hope the above comment doesn't give me a slap on the fingers like last time. *lol*
ReplyDeleteOne remark I forgot to make is that at our level, -2000 elo it has no benefits to let the computer thoroughly analyse our game(s).
You can better spend your time by analysing the game yourself. For example, for the opening open an opening book, either NCO or a monograph about the opening played. See where you left theory. From that point, where you left theory, just add one move and only one move to your known opening theory. It is a slow opening learning but atleast you will remember it later. If you add cluelessly twelve moves you will forget atleast ten of them.
Secondly try to calculate lines of atleast 3 to 5 moves in your after game analyse. If you have calculated a line then you may check it with a computer enginge to see if there are big flaws in the line you calculated.
Do not worry if you get it all wrong, its an exercise on calculation. Just find out why you made the analyse mistake (overlooking something? Being to quick to conclude a move is good? To fast in deciding about a move because of playing to quickly? ...).
Hey Chesstiger!
ReplyDelete"I do not know for sure but either you have a fixed idea in your head that one may not allow, at no cost, Bg4, or you are seeing threats that doesn't excist."
Truer words have never been written about me and my chess game. I DO INDEED tend to get worried about threats that don't exist. I am trying to work on that. :)
With regards to engines, I never let them just blindly annotate the game for me. After I go through the game on my own, I go through the game with the engine BUT have it set so that I can NOT see the engine's move choice. So that when the engine score JUMPS I then do what you suggest and sit there and try to calculate it out as to what could have been done better. This is slowly helping me to recognize "critical" moments in the game. I only look at the engine's answer well after trying to figure it out on my own.
Happy New Year!