Latest Updates:
Hot Topic (More than 10 Replies) Game analysis - request (Read 558 times)
an ordinary chessplayer
God Member
*****
Offline


I used to be not bad.

Posts: 1275
Location: Columbus, OH (USA)
Joined: 01/02/15
Re: Game analysis - request
Reply #14 - 09/17/21 at 06:16:45
Post Tools
Paul Garcia wrote on 09/16/21 at 08:48:18:
Can you say how my plan should look like  after 16. a5 ?


* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*
game after 16.a5

Your idea ...f7-f6, ...e6-e5 looks like it would just lose the d5-pawn for not very much. The engine likes 16...Bb5, which is good but not yet connected with any plan. I would choose to maneuver the knight from e7 to d6, with the most likely followup ...f7-f5, ...Nd6-e4.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paul Garcia
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 7
Joined: 09/12/21
Re: Game analysis - request
Reply #13 - 09/16/21 at 08:48:18
Post Tools
@Confused_by_Theory : thank you for your valuable input.

Here, I present a game which I managed to win although I was losing - it was a blunder to play 33. ... Qd7, I should have played 33. ... h6 instead. Having said that - I somehow failed to formulate a plan for this game. Can you say how my plan should look like  after 16. a5 ? I was someone hoping and preparing for f7-f6, e6 - e5 break but I'm not sure if it was correct. Any comments are welcome.

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Confused_by_Theory
Senior Member
****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 425
Location: Europe
Joined: 05/13/15
Gender: Male
Re: Game analysis - request
Reply #12 - 09/14/21 at 00:21:19
Post Tools
Hi.

Paul Garcia wrote on 09/13/21 at 08:39:37:
Hello,

I put the game where I successfully too advantage of my opponent's unprotected King position. I'm happy because of that game as I've had trouble with exploiting opponents' exposed King. Any comments are welcome.

%0A[Site%20%26quot;PlayOK%26quot;]%0A[Date%20%26quot;2021.09.13%26quot;]%0A[Round%20%26quot;-%26quot;]%0A[White%20%26quot;baretk%26quot;]%0A[Black%20%26quot;tienbinh0201%26quot;]%0A[Result%20%26quot;1-0%26quot;]%0A[Time%20%26quot;09:34:16%26quot;]%0A[TimeControl%20%26quot;180+5%26quot;]%0A[WhiteElo%20%26quot;1222%26quot;]%0A[BlackElo%20%26quot;1282%26quot;]%2032.%20Qh3%23%201-0]Download game in pgn format

I also have some questions:
1. was it reasonable for my opponent to push forward his queenside pawns taking into account that the center was not closed and that he had already played h6 - thus already weakening potential kingside castle? I know that with the center being closed (as in French advance variation) it is sometimes possible to push forward pawns on both sides on the board, but here I had opportunity to open the center at every point.
2. 10. Bf4 was immediately met with 10. ... g5, but if it wasn't and I managed to set up Qd2 and the position was roughly the same should I take h pawn if possible? General advice is that one should not take opponent's pawns on the same side where one castled in order not to open files which would allow the opponent to attack, but here I'm a piece up so it seems to me that I should manage to force exchanges and simplify the position. Or am I wrong?
3. I spent quite a lot of time considering if I should do something in order to rescue the knight after 21. ... Kc7. I think now that such an extensive analysis was not needed - after all I had the attack and in such situations it's generally best to just continue it. So 22. bxc6 was correct - it opened opponent's queenside of the board for me, taking into account that his King was in the center it just allowed me to continue initiative and the fact the Bxb5 would pin the knight was making bxc6 especially encouraging.

1.
Yes it was reasonable. Black has strategic problems if he doesn't manage to push some pawn to the fifth rank at some point and b5 around the time it was played seems about as good as any plan there. That being said, white being able to play a d5 or e5 thrust and in most realistic scenarios open up the game in process is a good thing for white. Sure.
2.
Black has less space and worse coordination so even if you technically open up slightly in front of your king by taking a h-pawn it is still going to be impossible for black to get a real initiative going (against decent play). Having the extra pawn is very nice as well.
3.
In a blitz game retreating loose pieces or just in general doing something that ups the safety of your position seems fine. In longer forms of chess just calculate and see if the situation with a threatened knight is indeed troublesome or not. Chess is absolutely full of situations where you can get away with having a seemingly loose piece or two. When a piece happens to drop off unexpectedly don't quote this Grin

As for the other games.
When black has a g4-h5 sort of weird construct of a pawn structure you can probably just go h3 at some point and try to open up the game.In general some pawn action seems advisable though since g4 is defended by its pawn friend and h5 hard to reach quickly.

In the game you went Nd7 it was indeed just a bad time for that move.

Have a nice day.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paul Garcia
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 7
Joined: 09/12/21
Re: Game analysis - request
Reply #11 - 09/13/21 at 19:14:04
Post Tools
Yes, and I don't and rather wouldn't (except perhaps for some special reasons) request extensive analysis for these games. I play these blitzes to learn some tricks which I think I often miss in long-time games and to learn some plan of games which I have some problems to formulate.
But I also play long-time control games, I'll post some here after I have played them.
However if you see some pretty obvious moves that I could have played better or some obvious things I can improve, the comments are welcome.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
an ordinary chessplayer
God Member
*****
Offline


I used to be not bad.

Posts: 1275
Location: Columbus, OH (USA)
Joined: 01/02/15
Re: Game analysis - request
Reply #10 - 09/13/21 at 18:08:13
Post Tools
It's good you are analyzing your own games. I took a look at these three and your comments are relevant, so your analysis is on the right track. But these are only 3'+5" games, I'm reluctant to spend more time analyzing than you took playing.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
proustiskeen
YaBB Moderator
*****
Offline


Hello from Omaha!

Posts: 669
Joined: 08/11/08
Re: Game analysis - request
Reply #9 - 09/13/21 at 13:47:10
Post Tools
I moved all the requests for game analysis here. One post with followups is enough for this kind of thing. Don't spam the forum with a post for each one.
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Paul Garcia
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 7
Joined: 09/12/21
Game analysis - dangerous Knight on the rim
Reply #8 - 09/13/21 at 09:06:02
Post Tools
Hi,



I lost the following game. I was surprised by the method by which my opponent managed to take advantage of his Knight on "a" file - attack on c7 is a standard trick, here we see attack on b6. This move in connection with the Black's unmoved b7 pawn allowed to severely restrict usability of the Black's "a" rook. 17. ... Nd7 was bad, I think - it allowed my opponent to pin my Knight against my Rook. I'd be much better with moves like ... Nc6, Be6.
Also, I think that I should have moved ... b5 or ... a6 much earlier.
Any comments are welcome.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paul Garcia
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 7
Joined: 09/12/21
Game analysis - Grob's defence
Reply #7 - 09/13/21 at 09:36:24
Post Tools
Hi,

I lost the following game.



It seemed to me that I should have some possibilities of exploiting the fact that he exposed his kingside early in the game but either it is not so easy or I failed to do it in this game.
My mistakes:
1. I failed to see that after 8. ... dxc6 he uncover file for his Queen attacking my pawn,
2. I failed to see that 14. Qg5 I'm leaving my f-pawn unprotected,
3. I failed to see that after his 20. ... Rf8 I can play 21. Rxe5. If he played then 21. ... Rf2 then after 22. Rxe8+ ... 23. Rxg8 Rxg2 the situation is unclear.

Any comments are welcome.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
proustiskeen
YaBB Moderator
*****
Offline


Hello from Omaha!

Posts: 669
Joined: 08/11/08
Re: Game analysis - two bishops vs two knights endgame
Reply #6 - 09/13/21 at 13:45:23
Post Tools
The last 1 Posts were moved here from General Chess [move by] proustiskeen.
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Paul Garcia
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 7
Joined: 09/12/21
Game analysis - opponent's unprotected King
Reply #5 - 09/13/21 at 08:39:37
Post Tools
Hello,

I put the game where I successfully too advantage of my opponent's unprotected King position. I'm happy because of that game as I've had trouble with exploiting opponents' exposed King. Any comments are welcome.



I also have some questions:
1. was it reasonable for my opponent to push forward his queenside pawns taking into account that the center was not closed and that he had already played h6 - thus already weakening potential kingside castle? I know that with the center being closed (as in French advance variation) it is sometimes possible to push forward pawns on both sides on the board, but here I had opportunity to open the center at every point.
2. 10. Bf4 was immediately met with 10. ... g5, but if it wasn't and I managed to set up Qd2 and the position was roughly the same should I take h pawn if possible? General advice is that one should not take opponent's pawns on the same side where one castled in order not to open files which would allow the opponent to attack, but here I'm a piece up so it seems to me that I should manage to force exchanges and simplify the position. Or am I wrong?
3. I spent quite a lot of time considering if I should do something in order to rescue the knight after 21. ... Kc7. I think now that such an extensive analysis was not needed - after all I had the attack and in such situations it's generally best to just continue it. So 22. bxc6 was correct - it opened opponent's queenside of the board for me, taking into account that his King was in the center it just allowed me to continue initiative and the fact the Bxb5 would pin the knight was making bxc6 especially encouraging.

Mistakes (on both sides):
1. I don't know if he actually saw that Rg8 I can play e5 protecting my knight with Bishop (so that if he captures it with his Rook, I take it). I'm not sure if he did 15. ... dxe5 on purpose, in my opinion just taking the Knight with Pawn was playable (by continuing defense by advancing his heavy pieces to seventh line).
2. "I don't know if he actually saw that Rg8 I can play e5 protecting my knight with Bishop" - I saw it only after the game, while I was analyzing it.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paul Garcia
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 7
Joined: 09/12/21
Re: Game analysis - two bishops vs two knights endgame
Reply #4 - 09/13/21 at 07:23:25
Post Tools
Thank you very much, I see that I'll have to do a lot of learning/analysis but these are some very good starting points, with reference to details!
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10620
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Game analysis - two bishops vs two knights endgame
Reply #3 - 09/13/21 at 06:17:56
Post Tools
AOC didn't mention two strategical mistakes you made after the exchange 27.Bxd5 :

1. you put many pawns on black squares, decreasing the activity and attacking potential of your remaining bishop;
2. you helped your opponent to create the more dangerous passed pawn.
  

The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged.
GC Lichtenberg
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
an ordinary chessplayer
God Member
*****
Offline


I used to be not bad.

Posts: 1275
Location: Columbus, OH (USA)
Joined: 01/02/15
Re: Game analysis - two bishops vs two knights endgame
Reply #2 - 09/13/21 at 02:28:24
Post Tools
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*
after 24...Nxc7

Here you played 25.Be2 Nd5 26.Bc4 Kf8 27.Bxd5 cxd5. This was completely wrong. It's not wrong to *ever* play bishop takes knight, since transformation of advantages is a basic technique in endgames. But instead of transforming your advantage, you basically gave it up for nothing. You should have waited for the right moment to play bishop takes knight. At a minimum, you needed to centralize your king first.

To learn how to play with the bishop pair, see a classic demonstration Rosenthal vs Steinitz, Vienna 1873. You can search the web and compare what different experts think about this game. Also by searching you will find links to other interesting examples. In particular, Reti in Masters of the Chessboard gives a good explanation of black's method in Rosenthal vs Steinitz. The kibitzing by Honza Cervenka (2002.10.07) at chessgames.com is an *extremely* terse paraphrase of Reti's explanation. https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1132616 But I recommend reading Reti's notes if you can find them.

* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*
after 27...cxd5

This position is about equal, but very quickly you turned it into a loss. 28.Kf2 Ke7 29.Bg3 Ke6 30. Ke3 b5 31. Bb8 a6 32. Ba7 Nd7 33.Bd4 g6 34.g4 f5 35.gxf5+ Kxf5 36.h4 h5 37.b4 g5 38.hxg5 Kxg5.

* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*
after 38...Kxg5

White is lost. Except for 28.Kf2, just about all your moves were at least a little bit bad. Therefore, for now I recommend skipping a study of two bishops endings and instead study various one bishop versus one knight endings. This will also help you play two bishop endings better, since knowing when to play (or not to play) BxN is pretty important in that ending.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Confused_by_Theory
Senior Member
****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 425
Location: Europe
Joined: 05/13/15
Gender: Male
Re: Game analysis - two bishops vs two knights endgame
Reply #1 - 09/12/21 at 19:24:46
Post Tools
Hi.

Go over it with a computer I guess. It looks like a very human game where there are lots of improvements.

I think from a human perspective it is enough to say that 35.gxf5+, 36.h4 and even 37.b4 are three weakening moves in a row (varying degrees) and that very much tilted the balance. Pawn play is tricky in a lot of endgames. If possible with regards to thinking time and energy etc. Having a tough standard for determining if pawn moves are to be played in the endgame is usually a good idea.

Have a nice day.

P.S. you may have interest for these topics in the endgame section. There are definitely people who like doing endgame analysis and stuff like that but mostly there.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paul Garcia
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 7
Joined: 09/12/21
Game analysis - request
09/12/21 at 18:15:08
Post Tools
Good morning,

I have lost the endgame where I had two bishops vs my opponent's two knights. I really have no idea what I have done wrong, can you give some advice? Thanks!

« Last Edit: 09/13/21 at 13:46:42 by proustiskeen »  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo