Cool mate in 4 at the end.
let me know what you guys think
let me know what you guys think
Nice
Nice mate! What was the motivation behind 10.@Bg6?
I don't understand. What's cool about this? (And, I'm a mostly a ZH player, but not very good.)
Based upon the opening and moves until the last 4 moves, I understand each player's series of moves. (They're moves I might have made; save a few; and I only spend a few seconds scanning through the game.)
The last 4 moves, while not what I would consider a "standard" or "forced" mate (may be forced, but I haven't fully analyzed it) ... are still pretty "standard" moves that any high-level ZH player might make, especially during a 5-minute game (where I have time to think, versus usually playing 3-minute games.)
First, the last 4 moves depends on the pawn drop at d5, then ...
24. Nd4++
This is almost a no-brainer given NO material in-hand, but, is either a forced win if 24...Kd6, or, continues with either 25. Nc6 forking the Queen and King (material in-hand) or as played, 25. Qe6.
Then the king only has one option ... and the next move is mate.
So, it's not that significant a find or altogether that interesting in the realm or spectrum of ZH play.
Both you and your opponent rated much higher than myself, and I'm able to provide this commentary (just flipping through the game quickly without much thought)... what was your motivation for posting this game as some sort of interesting novelty? (Does a review of your games need to be suggested?)
No offense or anything, I'm not a very good player, but I don't see how this is novel or interesting ... I've seen and played much more interesting and complex end-games than this in my lowly-rated time.
Based upon the opening and moves until the last 4 moves, I understand each player's series of moves. (They're moves I might have made; save a few; and I only spend a few seconds scanning through the game.)
The last 4 moves, while not what I would consider a "standard" or "forced" mate (may be forced, but I haven't fully analyzed it) ... are still pretty "standard" moves that any high-level ZH player might make, especially during a 5-minute game (where I have time to think, versus usually playing 3-minute games.)
First, the last 4 moves depends on the pawn drop at d5, then ...
24. Nd4++
This is almost a no-brainer given NO material in-hand, but, is either a forced win if 24...Kd6, or, continues with either 25. Nc6 forking the Queen and King (material in-hand) or as played, 25. Qe6.
Then the king only has one option ... and the next move is mate.
So, it's not that significant a find or altogether that interesting in the realm or spectrum of ZH play.
Both you and your opponent rated much higher than myself, and I'm able to provide this commentary (just flipping through the game quickly without much thought)... what was your motivation for posting this game as some sort of interesting novelty? (Does a review of your games need to be suggested?)
No offense or anything, I'm not a very good player, but I don't see how this is novel or interesting ... I've seen and played much more interesting and complex end-games than this in my lowly-rated time.
@MrCharles I really did not think into that much, just thought it was a pretty neat mate in 4. Not saying its a masterpiece of a game or anything, just an interesting mate in 4.
@AREA11 yeah probably not the best move, i just wanted to stay aggressive and defend the pawn at the same time.
@Ominous
In truth, I've always found the 8. N@f5 move a bit fishy (don't like exchanging the Knight for Bishop in that fashion early on) -- but, what do I know, I'm a lowly-rated ZH player.
But, the next 9...B@g4 followed by 10.B@g6 is interesting.
To me, the mid-game setup where there's a potential Q trade becomes more interesting than the final 4-moves and mating sequence. Especially given lack of Q trade.
Then again, using material in hand to draw-out the King (and/or prevent a protective castling with supplementary pieces in hand) is almost always a good move or sequence if exchanges are about equal. (IF. And I usually play fast and loose at a disadvantage knowing I'll likely make it up later with patterns and practices.)
Anyway, don't listen to me ... I'm a lowly-rated ZH player (your rating is higher, rightfully so). I found the mid-game moves more interesting than the mating sequence in this case.
In truth, I've always found the 8. N@f5 move a bit fishy (don't like exchanging the Knight for Bishop in that fashion early on) -- but, what do I know, I'm a lowly-rated ZH player.
But, the next 9...B@g4 followed by 10.B@g6 is interesting.
To me, the mid-game setup where there's a potential Q trade becomes more interesting than the final 4-moves and mating sequence. Especially given lack of Q trade.
Then again, using material in hand to draw-out the King (and/or prevent a protective castling with supplementary pieces in hand) is almost always a good move or sequence if exchanges are about equal. (IF. And I usually play fast and loose at a disadvantage knowing I'll likely make it up later with patterns and practices.)
Anyway, don't listen to me ... I'm a lowly-rated ZH player (your rating is higher, rightfully so). I found the mid-game moves more interesting than the mating sequence in this case.
If I had a quid for every time I'd missed one of those... the moral I think is to consider 'what happens if I drop-sac the bishop?'
@Marlonc gets it!
@MrCharles #4
Actually, Ominous had a 5.2 centipawn advantage after his opponent blundered on move 15, as well as having a forced mate available by move 21. I partially agree with your points; I'm just stating facts. Not trying to make you look dumb or anything.
Actually, Ominous had a 5.2 centipawn advantage after his opponent blundered on move 15, as well as having a forced mate available by move 21. I partially agree with your points; I'm just stating facts. Not trying to make you look dumb or anything.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.