ITG : I play like a really crappy Tal

I started the game trying to go into a lundon gambit, but things don't go as planned, my opponent isn't sophisticated enough to understand how he's *supposed* to blunder, and instead blunders in a way that means I have to get creative, so I blunder harder than him to set up a nasty attack, and completely ignore him taking all my pieces. Amazingly, this somehow wasn't a series of blunders, and instead turned into a series of computer approved sacrifices, I sac my pawn, I sac my rook, I sac my knight, I sac my other rook, leading to my check mating my opponent in a really sophisticated way.

these are not computer approved, look at the analysis- you should never throw away pieces for a wild dream of mate, you got lucky and this wont work at a higher rating

@HarveyStewart04

Yes, they are, look, I only got 2 blunders., which I explained. The rest were fine by the computers standards. Have a better look and don't be such a sour puss, I gave exactly as advertised. I know it wouldn't have worked on a more sophisticated opponent, a more sophisticated opponent would have taken the pawn on move 2.

no bro you don’t understand- sacrificing every single piece there was useless it didn’t create an attack at all and the engine clearly says white is so much better after every sacrifice- you just got lucky and he blundered mate. it wouldn’t work against a more sophisticated opponent because they would never blunder mate in one and instead destroy you with their huge material advantage. my biggest advice for a player u1800 including myself is not to sacrifice pieces for positional advantages as 90% of the time it’s inaccurate unless you know what you are doing- it’s best to work in short tactics and blunders instead of crazy positional stuff

+… means white is better -… means black is better btw xD if that’s what got you confused

The 12th move you even gave your queen kind of weird why you gave your queen Your opponent missed that no other blunder has been very bad apart from that well i have nothing else to say

@F-35_Lightning

Yeah, the real question is, why did the computer not consider it a blunder?

@HarveyStewart04

No, I think you're confused. I *know* god damn well that my opponent was winning the whole time.
I *know* damn well, that wasn't a good game.

I didn't think the game was very good, but I was very amused to see the game didn't think all the pieces I let get captured were "blunders", sure they probably weren't "winning", but the computer didn't consider them "losing" by marking it as a mistake.

The fact my queen on the 12th wasn't considered a blunder really amused me.

I'm sorry you don't find this amusing, because I certainly thought it was funny and just wanted to share it. Sorry I distracted you from your serious business chess games.

This was very silly but I’m surprised your opponent didn’t take the queen or stop the checkmate very well

The computer no longer counts blunders when the evaluation is +/- 6, so saying that you had no more blunders is incorrect. You definite did, but the computer didn't mark them. You gave the opponent +6 on move 3. Saying you only had 2 blunders is "true", but doesn't mean anything.