Let's see, you just drew a master! How do you think you did? ;)
And incidentally, you probably should've started pushing those two passers on move 27 (instead of letting them get traded off).
And incidentally, you probably should've started pushing those two passers on move 27 (instead of letting them get traded off).
Ok thanks!
@ move 27. You already have 2 passed pawns that are quite impossible to stop. If you see the figure at move 26, the rook protect the backwards pawn, and that pawn protects the other one.
If your rook is at d2, you can just push c3, if he attacks it, you push d4 and you have the same figure, but 1 step closer to promoting. This forces the king away from the a 7 rank to help on the defense, and you can maintain the tension there drawing probably the king and rook while you use the tempos to get your king closer.
Once your king is close to the action, you may proceed to change those 2 passed pawns for his kingside pawns or just use the king to push the c-d pawns.
And also, for instance, move 42, you took that pawn 1 square away from promotion.
It didnt really mattered here, as his king was able to get in time to the defense 1 move later if needed, but you should only do a commitment (giving a rook for a pawn) until you absolutely need. You knew that the exchange was unavoidable, , which is fine, but you should have waited until he actually promoted.
In some cases, you might have a surprise move with the rook at the last moment, but making the capture on a8 instead of a7 gives you an extra tempo, as the king is 1 square farther away from duties. It wasnt necessary here, but in other endgames that extra tempo is the win.
If your rook is at d2, you can just push c3, if he attacks it, you push d4 and you have the same figure, but 1 step closer to promoting. This forces the king away from the a 7 rank to help on the defense, and you can maintain the tension there drawing probably the king and rook while you use the tempos to get your king closer.
Once your king is close to the action, you may proceed to change those 2 passed pawns for his kingside pawns or just use the king to push the c-d pawns.
And also, for instance, move 42, you took that pawn 1 square away from promotion.
It didnt really mattered here, as his king was able to get in time to the defense 1 move later if needed, but you should only do a commitment (giving a rook for a pawn) until you absolutely need. You knew that the exchange was unavoidable, , which is fine, but you should have waited until he actually promoted.
In some cases, you might have a surprise move with the rook at the last moment, but making the capture on a8 instead of a7 gives you an extra tempo, as the king is 1 square farther away from duties. It wasnt necessary here, but in other endgames that extra tempo is the win.
@PremierGrandmaster
Are you an anonymous titled player who has started playing on lichess recently?
Or was the NM drunk?
I am not doubting you but the match and result is highly surprising!
Nevertheless, the draw against a titled player will definitely inspire you and boost your confidence.
Are you an anonymous titled player who has started playing on lichess recently?
Or was the NM drunk?
I am not doubting you but the match and result is highly surprising!
Nevertheless, the draw against a titled player will definitely inspire you and boost your confidence.
Ok.game!
Its a fine game!
@Akbar2thegreat
Thanks for the advice.
No, I am no where near being titled yet.
No, it was a simul, so this could be why.
Thanks for the advice.
No, I am no where near being titled yet.
No, it was a simul, so this could be why.
No one is going to talk about the fact that it was a simul? I defeated an IM today in a simul. He blundered as he was playing 30 boards. He had an extra hour which he spent playing others but I spent calculating the exchange sacrifice.
Anyway when I first drew a titled player, a WIM, it was an incredible feeling. But as a matter of fact I have never even drew a titled player in a one-on-one game(not a simul).
Anyway when I first drew a titled player, a WIM, it was an incredible feeling. But as a matter of fact I have never even drew a titled player in a one-on-one game(not a simul).
@AbhirupPal said in #9:
> No one is going to talk about the fact that it was a simul? I defeated an IM today in a simul. He blundered as he was playing 30 boards. He had an extra hour which he spent playing others but I spent calculating the exchange sacrifice.
> Anyway when I first drew a titled player, a WIM, it was an incredible feeling. But as a matter of fact I have never even drew a titled player in a one-on-one game(not a simul).
Bro, you don't need to brag about it. He literally admitted it was a simul. @PremierGrandmaster said in #8:
> @Akbar2thegreat
> Thanks for the advice.
> No, I am no where near being titled yet.
> No, it was a simul, so this could be why.
> No one is going to talk about the fact that it was a simul? I defeated an IM today in a simul. He blundered as he was playing 30 boards. He had an extra hour which he spent playing others but I spent calculating the exchange sacrifice.
> Anyway when I first drew a titled player, a WIM, it was an incredible feeling. But as a matter of fact I have never even drew a titled player in a one-on-one game(not a simul).
Bro, you don't need to brag about it. He literally admitted it was a simul. @PremierGrandmaster said in #8:
> @Akbar2thegreat
> Thanks for the advice.
> No, I am no where near being titled yet.
> No, it was a simul, so this could be why.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.