Any feedback, positive or negative would be great.
I can already smell NM mrpushwood posting "the machine says it all"
I can already smell NM mrpushwood posting "the machine says it all"
Overall a pretty good game I'd say, nice endgame finish. Instead of all the pawn trading, an idea is perhaps to play 24.a4 and 25.Ba3 and then focus on preparing to push the d pawn in an advantage way or use the d pawn to distract the black pieces and win on another part of the board.
p.s. Glad to see I am not the only one not being amused with MrNagWood "all the time". My fun to post something new in the generic Lichess forums has gone to the direction of zero.
p.s. Glad to see I am not the only one not being amused with MrNagWood "all the time". My fun to post something new in the generic Lichess forums has gone to the direction of zero.
@Akarsh_2010 said in #1:
> Any feedback, positive or negative would be great.
Firstly: you play way better than me, so I write out of pure curiosity, no criticism intended!
And yet you can lose a noticeable advantage (there is hope for me, after all!)... I wonder if you knew it at the time, or at least you had some feeling about it. Move 21. Be2 is especially strange to me because 0-0 seems so natural... what were your ideas? Can you notice you have a better position or is it something easily missed? Usually, I can't calculate it but somehow good positions feel more comfortable or natural, as if it was easier to play (very likely it really is!).
Other than that, I like your use of pawns. That pushing of the a-pawn is quite impressive (Queen exchange wasn't Black's better idea, BTW) as is the intimidating power of the pawn in d6.
> Any feedback, positive or negative would be great.
Firstly: you play way better than me, so I write out of pure curiosity, no criticism intended!
And yet you can lose a noticeable advantage (there is hope for me, after all!)... I wonder if you knew it at the time, or at least you had some feeling about it. Move 21. Be2 is especially strange to me because 0-0 seems so natural... what were your ideas? Can you notice you have a better position or is it something easily missed? Usually, I can't calculate it but somehow good positions feel more comfortable or natural, as if it was easier to play (very likely it really is!).
Other than that, I like your use of pawns. That pushing of the a-pawn is quite impressive (Queen exchange wasn't Black's better idea, BTW) as is the intimidating power of the pawn in d6.
@OctoPinky said in #3:
> Firstly: you play way better than me, so I write out of pure curiosity, no criticism intended!
>
> And yet you can lose a noticeable advantage (there is hope for me, after all!)
Trust me, this sort of thing happens quite a bit. ( i even failed the captcha :/ )
>... I wonder if you knew it at the time, or at least
>you had some feeling about it. Move 21. Be2 is especially strange to me because 0-0 seems so natural... what were >your ideas? Can you notice you have a better position or is it something easily missed? Usually, I can't calculate it >but somehow good positions feel more comfortable or natural, as if it was easier to play (very likely it really is!).
The idea of 21.Be2 was to put pressure on the now weakened pawn on h5, while simultaneously defending the c5 pawn. At the time I felt I was better, not winning, as I had a protected passer,but it was still complicated. If I had to throw An eval, it would be about +1. Now looking at it, casting followed by Be2 if Bxc5 looks stronger, but not to the point that i would say its a blunder.
I still don't know why the engine is saying Be2 is a blunder...
> Other than that, I like your use of pawns. That pushing of the a-pawn is quite impressive (Queen exchange wasn't Black's better idea, BTW) as is the intimidating power of the pawn in d6.
I really had no other plans, trying to push the d pawn by getting rid of the knight seemed impossible and my king was miles away, so walking the king would be too slow. a4 a5 a6 Be3 seemed like a plausible plan, so I went for it. Until Nc5 my opponent had chances to draw, but after Nc5 I was easily able to calculate I was winning after Nxc5 Bxc5 a6 Ke6 Be3 Bxe3 fxe3 due to my passed pawns, which my opponent can stop with Nd7 Nb6 and the other one with his king, but then I simply go Ne2 Nc4 and bring my king and all my opponent can do is wait, Any attempt to get rid of my knight leads to a pawn becoming a queen.
> Firstly: you play way better than me, so I write out of pure curiosity, no criticism intended!
>
> And yet you can lose a noticeable advantage (there is hope for me, after all!)
Trust me, this sort of thing happens quite a bit. ( i even failed the captcha :/ )
>... I wonder if you knew it at the time, or at least
>you had some feeling about it. Move 21. Be2 is especially strange to me because 0-0 seems so natural... what were >your ideas? Can you notice you have a better position or is it something easily missed? Usually, I can't calculate it >but somehow good positions feel more comfortable or natural, as if it was easier to play (very likely it really is!).
The idea of 21.Be2 was to put pressure on the now weakened pawn on h5, while simultaneously defending the c5 pawn. At the time I felt I was better, not winning, as I had a protected passer,but it was still complicated. If I had to throw An eval, it would be about +1. Now looking at it, casting followed by Be2 if Bxc5 looks stronger, but not to the point that i would say its a blunder.
I still don't know why the engine is saying Be2 is a blunder...
> Other than that, I like your use of pawns. That pushing of the a-pawn is quite impressive (Queen exchange wasn't Black's better idea, BTW) as is the intimidating power of the pawn in d6.
I really had no other plans, trying to push the d pawn by getting rid of the knight seemed impossible and my king was miles away, so walking the king would be too slow. a4 a5 a6 Be3 seemed like a plausible plan, so I went for it. Until Nc5 my opponent had chances to draw, but after Nc5 I was easily able to calculate I was winning after Nxc5 Bxc5 a6 Ke6 Be3 Bxe3 fxe3 due to my passed pawns, which my opponent can stop with Nd7 Nb6 and the other one with his king, but then I simply go Ne2 Nc4 and bring my king and all my opponent can do is wait, Any attempt to get rid of my knight leads to a pawn becoming a queen.
@Akarsh_2010 said in #1:
> I can already smell NM mrpushwood posting "the machine says it all"
I agree! (though I don't think I smell)
> I can already smell NM mrpushwood posting "the machine says it all"
I agree! (though I don't think I smell)
1. Your opponent played too fast in the beginning, and you took advantage of it.
2. I didn't understand all those knight movements from him at the start of the game.
12. c4 - The way you've advanced the queen side pawns is amazing! It made all the difference in the endgame :D
2. I didn't understand all those knight movements from him at the start of the game.
12. c4 - The way you've advanced the queen side pawns is amazing! It made all the difference in the endgame :D
I certainly like your use of the Q-side pawns, beginning with 10.b4 and 12.c4. The space you gain not only restricted black, but led to your strong passed pawns in the endgame.
I though Be2 was fine, but then it's a simple, direct way to tickle the weakness/h5. I like simple and direct. You combined play on both sides of the board very nicely. Did you keep tactical control all that time? I'm not using the machine to analyse, but I'll guess pretty much. Nothing serious leaps out at me.
I though Be2 was fine, but then it's a simple, direct way to tickle the weakness/h5. I like simple and direct. You combined play on both sides of the board very nicely. Did you keep tactical control all that time? I'm not using the machine to analyse, but I'll guess pretty much. Nothing serious leaps out at me.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.