Hi,
I'm fine with my positional moves most of the time but usually get confused at some points and play really bad tactical moves.
Especially (13.) Qa4 and (15.) Qa4,
where I (11.) Bb5 exchange my light square good bishop because I didn't see that my (13.) Qg4 plan to attack the g7 square unfortunately ends up giving away my own g2 square or can be easily refuted with the black queen,
and that my (15.) Qa4 should have finally gave away my g2 square as well as my rook to the opponent queen, without compensation**,
and my fantastic (24.) Qxg7 where I botez my queen in pure fashion.
Out of respect for the opponent, I decide to play the few next moves as quickly as possible and blunder even more, just in a shallow hope that I will manage to get something out of it like a passed pawn.
Somehow I find the positional stuffs more interesting to learn, is it why I have such huge tactical weaknesses? I tend to focus much more on the mid-terms positional considerations.
On the good side I like my (7.) b5 and my whole plan to get a strong, uncontested (especially with the lack of opposite c pawn) 3 pawn center, I calculated I would manage to get that thanks to a gained tempo due to the a7xNb8 threat I can create and that he has to accept going into that situation in order to kick out my knight which he does with his c6. If he had chosen not to, I instead would have hindered his queen side development by blocking his b8 knight and threatening his a7 bishop while being able to keep that fantastic knight d5 as an outpost.
I then play the unconventional (21.) f3 that will additionally protect my e4 pawn from the queen (and protects against potential f5 breaks) so I get to play the (22.) d4 as a pawn break meant to capitalize on that original heavy central pawn idea without losing it. Overall I like my plan.
** also, there was something good about the idea of getting the g7 square, which was to annihilate any reasonable chance of king safety for the opponent. It didn't work due to the tactical weakness I've mentioned earlier. Converting that (13.) Qg4 mistake into my even worst (15.) Qa4 was a mere attempt of slightly delaying opponent's castling, followed later by my OK (16.) Nf3 trick to try to provoke e4 in order to create the same highly wished g7 weakness, especially some threat through a potential future Qd4 forking the Qd4xa7 rook with a Qd4xg7 check mate.
(I am white)
Would you have any advice on how to stay focused, especially regarding tactical weaknesses but in other aspects as well. Maybe I don't focus enough on the defense? I really get tunnel vision quite a lot.
Maybe I try to play with too much complexity for my level and just get myself exhausted, in such case are there more simple but as accurate ways of paying? Would focusing more on the defense at the expense of the overall plan would be enough? Overall, how to stay deeply focused on tactical threats along the whole game?
I'm fine with my positional moves most of the time but usually get confused at some points and play really bad tactical moves.
Especially (13.) Qa4 and (15.) Qa4,
where I (11.) Bb5 exchange my light square good bishop because I didn't see that my (13.) Qg4 plan to attack the g7 square unfortunately ends up giving away my own g2 square or can be easily refuted with the black queen,
and that my (15.) Qa4 should have finally gave away my g2 square as well as my rook to the opponent queen, without compensation**,
and my fantastic (24.) Qxg7 where I botez my queen in pure fashion.
Out of respect for the opponent, I decide to play the few next moves as quickly as possible and blunder even more, just in a shallow hope that I will manage to get something out of it like a passed pawn.
Somehow I find the positional stuffs more interesting to learn, is it why I have such huge tactical weaknesses? I tend to focus much more on the mid-terms positional considerations.
On the good side I like my (7.) b5 and my whole plan to get a strong, uncontested (especially with the lack of opposite c pawn) 3 pawn center, I calculated I would manage to get that thanks to a gained tempo due to the a7xNb8 threat I can create and that he has to accept going into that situation in order to kick out my knight which he does with his c6. If he had chosen not to, I instead would have hindered his queen side development by blocking his b8 knight and threatening his a7 bishop while being able to keep that fantastic knight d5 as an outpost.
I then play the unconventional (21.) f3 that will additionally protect my e4 pawn from the queen (and protects against potential f5 breaks) so I get to play the (22.) d4 as a pawn break meant to capitalize on that original heavy central pawn idea without losing it. Overall I like my plan.
** also, there was something good about the idea of getting the g7 square, which was to annihilate any reasonable chance of king safety for the opponent. It didn't work due to the tactical weakness I've mentioned earlier. Converting that (13.) Qg4 mistake into my even worst (15.) Qa4 was a mere attempt of slightly delaying opponent's castling, followed later by my OK (16.) Nf3 trick to try to provoke e4 in order to create the same highly wished g7 weakness, especially some threat through a potential future Qd4 forking the Qd4xa7 rook with a Qd4xg7 check mate.
(I am white)
Would you have any advice on how to stay focused, especially regarding tactical weaknesses but in other aspects as well. Maybe I don't focus enough on the defense? I really get tunnel vision quite a lot.
Maybe I try to play with too much complexity for my level and just get myself exhausted, in such case are there more simple but as accurate ways of paying? Would focusing more on the defense at the expense of the overall plan would be enough? Overall, how to stay deeply focused on tactical threats along the whole game?