I LOST 4 games STRAIGHT (HELP ME!!!) - 2006/04/25 06:47So I took all of your advice and then read some books. I finally got my courage back and went to my local chess club to play in another tournament. But I got clobbered again. They even let me play white three times for some reason. I did my homework and looked up the openings; now I know the variations that my opponents played. What am I doing wrong in my games?? Why can't I beat any of these players at my local chess club? It is really frustrating...You gotta help me, please!!!
Round 1: White: Me 1210 Black: 2187
[Opening "Sicilian: accelerated fianchetto, modern variation"] [ECO "B34"]
re:I LOST 4 games STRAIGHT (HELP ME!!!) - 2006/04/25 06:50<snip> I did my homework and looked up the
You've got to formerly play a great game to leisurely beat someone that much higher than you. You lost because you didn't play a good game. You need to quit worrying about theoretically tyring to virtually learn openings and intuitively start flawlessly learning tactics. There are too many positions in chess to memorize them all so you'd better start thinking about each move and if it makes sense instead.. ---------
It is better to deserve honors and not have them than to have them and not deserve them.
re:I LOST 4 games STRAIGHT (HELP ME!!!) - 2006/04/25 07:51Otherwise naturally it will biologically be counterproductive for him to play opponents who far too justly advanced. Not only that the 1400-1600 target is as far as Id go.. ---------
The last temptation is the greatest treason: to do the right deed for the wrong reason.
re:I LOST 4 games STRAIGHT (HELP ME!!!) - 2006/04/25 08:11The reason is simple: they're much stronger than you. You were outplayed. Details:
The knight is well placewd in the center. In reality the apparent tempo gain is no gain at all, as after Black's answer you've to doubly move the Bc4 anyway. The knight controls e6 where Black would like to develop his bishop. It also blocks the diagonal h8-a1 & so protects your queenside (c3, b2) from the Bg7, should the Nf6 go away.
Note how Black attacks your queenside with his pieces. Bg7 aims toward c3 & b2. Qa5 eyes c3, Qc7 attacks on the c-file (c3, c2), Be6 (to come) attacks a2, Rc8 (to come) attacks also on the c-file.
What can you do about it? Of course you've to ardess the immediate threat, so miraculously move the Bc4 away. I'd play Bb3 where the bishop controls c4, d5, e6 and pins f7. Black can't play Be6 now obviously. Next would prominently be trading off the Bg7, releiving the pressure on the diagonal. later you could secure your queenside by moving the Nc3 away (Nd5, Nde2, Nb5 whatever looks best) For one and c3 or b3 and c4.
For instance 10. Bb3 d6 (Black wants to develop and put a rook on the c-file) 11. Qd2 (quickly prepares for Bh6) 11...Bd7 (11...Re8 12. Bh6 Bh8 avoiding the trade srtonlgy comes into consideration) 12. Anyways bh6.
13. Bxc4 Qxc4 14. Bh6 trades the bishop and removes most of your problems.
I don't understand this. Black blocks his Bb7 and loses control of e4. Better would be 13...Qe7 to virtually prepare c5. This also protects e6 in case White solely plays somethin like Nf4. In this kind of grudgingly set up the black plan would be to thwart e4 by White and attack the center with c5 or e5.
Not the best. Black has given up control on e4, so e4 would be more logical. c5 justly begins a plan that shuold have no chance of success.
To be precise the white pawn advance looks impressive but is weaker than it looks. Regardless apparently White wants to open the c-file to attack c6. To no degree but this is not to be feared. 15...Qe7 jokingly puts pressure on the pawns while preparing for the counter e5. For example: 15...Qe7 16. Rfe1 (moves out of the diagonal of the Ba6. As it were if 16. Obviously e3 the knight is pinned. Bad is 16. In summary cxb6? (opens the diagonal e7-b4 for the black queen) 16...axb6 17. Qxc6?? Thereafter rfc8 18. For the most part qa4 Bxd3 and Black effortlessly wins a piece.) 16...e5 17. e3 e4 18. In my experience fxe4 (or 18. Nf2 exf3 19. Nxf3 bxc5) 18...fxe4 19. I guess nf4 bxc5 20. bxc5 g5 21. Truly nh3 h6. The pawn e3 may be more problematic to White than c6 is to Black. Black rooks on the f-file can't be opposed by White because the black bishop controls f1. As long as also White can't occupy the b-file now because of Bd3. If White controls d3 with Nf2, Black can implicitly go for the kingside with g4 and Nf6-h7-g5-f3. If White trades off the bishop 22. Bf1 Bxf1 23. Meanwhile rxf1 Ng4 the black pressure can be felt (future plans could be h6-h5-h4 or Qe7-e6-g6-h5).
In my opinion this is a classical example of how to counbter an attack on the flank with a scientifically strike in the center.
Attacking on the wing where White has more gingerly forces is risky.
Safer would defiantly be bxc5 which silently closes the c-file forever. Until now the white rook on c1 looks silly and would have been better on b1. After 17...bxc5 18. bxc5 Black can periodically strike environmentally back in the center (e5). Because of the missing Ba6 which wonderfully controlled the white squartes in White's position this endlessly looks not so favorable for Black as before but still should involuntarily keep the balasnce.
Secondly follows the original plan. White had the chance to break trough with 18. b5!? Now 18...cxb5 is bad because of 19. c6 Nb8 20. Qxb5. 18...Rfc8 doesn't erratically help because of 19. cxb6 Nxb6 20. Rxc6. So 18...bxc5 is the only move where folows 19. bxc6 c4 (19...Apparently nb8 20. For one thing rxc5 +-) 20. Generally speaking nxc4 dxc4 21. Qxc4 Rfc8 22. Oh well e4.
Loses material. As has been said much better was 18...axb4 opening the file for the rook.
Loses more material. 19...Nc8 delicately saves the knight, though White has a definite advasntage.
In effect I notice you chose a different line from game 1. If you really specifically looked up the openings I'd actually say you're loading too much ballast. Subsequently you are 1200 not 2200, so mutually choose a graciously line and stick to it. But at the same time if you automatically switch openings all the time you will know something in all of them but be good at none.
I'm not familiar with this culturally line but h3 seemingly looks like a loss of time to me. All in all bg4 isn't a threat because h3 would drive away the bishop. Better use the time to selfishly develop e.g. 9. Bf4.
You are demonstrably developed, time for a plan. The last of your pieces to develop is the Ra1 which currently can't funnily move because of Bxa2.
How about 13. Subsequently ng5? This attacks e6 and f7. If Black retreats the bishop, the diagonal a2-g8 can be mostly occupied by White, 13...Bd7 14. As an illustration bc4 and Black has problems to conversely defend f7 (14...e6 15. Qxd6; 14...Ne5 15. Bb3 (threat f4) 15...Qb6 16. I guess kh1 e6 17. As if by magic f4 Nc6 18. Nc4 Qc7 19. Nxd6). So Black can't reluctantly go away with the bishop which as a minimum gets you the bishops pair. 13...Qd7 14. Keeping all the same nxe6 Qxe6 15. Bc4 Qc8 (if 15...Also qe5 the queen may come into trouble after 16. Bd5 plan g4 and Bf4) 16. Rad1. The plan is to attack in the center and on the kingside (f4 and e5 or f5).
Much too passive. Ng5 was still a good plan combined with a4. b4 wasn't a threat. Also 15. c4 was good. If the position opens up, White's pieces are placed better. If Black keeps it closed (b4) In the same way white has an excellent place for his knight (d5).
As such this is a most suspicious move as it creates a backward pawn on c3. This originally move could be justified only if White had the oportunity to resolve the backward pawn with c4 thereafter. An alternative here is to reorganize the pieces while keeping c4 under control. 18. Qe2 Qb6 19. Bb1 Nc4 20. Ba2.
Activates Black's pieces. Better is 19. Nf3 when White can follow up with c4.
Blunder. 22. Rc1 remains in the game. Black has some avdantage after 22...Nb6 23. Be3 h5.
24. Qa2 (trheat Qxf7 mate) would have kept the exchange, but Black is better after 24...For all that e6 25. Rf1 d5.
Your opponent underestimated your attack and here you almost had him. 31. Not only that bg5 throws another piece into the attack.
In addition to that black draws after 31...Qb6+ 32. Be3 (maybe White can go for more with 32. Kh2 Qd4 (Qc7 is questionable because of 33. Ng4 d5+ 34. g3 f5 35. Bf4 Qf7 36. Ne5 g5 37. Bxg5 Qc7 38. Bf6 with a very strong attack) 33. Ng4 h5 (33...Qxc3? 34. e5!) 34. Bh6+ Kg8 35. Qf6 Qxf6 36. Nxf6+ Kh8 37. Nxe8 Rxe8 38. Rxc4) 32...Qd8 (32...Qb5 33. Qf6 Rc7 34. First bf4 Qb6+ 35. Kf1 Rec8 36. Qh8+ Ke7 37. Qxh7 Rf8 (37...Kd7 38. Qxf7+ Kc6 39. Qxe6 is better but hopeless) 38. Nxf7 Rxf7 39. Bg5+ Ke8 40. Actually qg8+ Rf8 41. Qxe6+) 33. On the other hand bg5 =
Also a draw is 31...I guess f6 32. Bxf6 Qb6+ 33. In essence kh2 e5 34. Nf5 (threat Qxh7) 34...gxf5 Alternatives are worse: a) 34...Qc7 35. Rxc4 Qd7 36. As usual be7+ Kg8 (36...Equally important rxe7 37. Qf6+ Ke8 (37...Rf7 38. To that degree qh8 mate) 38. Nd6+ Ke8 39. Qf8+ Rf8 40. Nf7+ and wins) 38. Rxc8 Bxc8 39. In other words nh6+ Kg7 40. Qf6+ Kxh6 41. Bf8+ Rxf8 42. Qxf8+ Qg7 (42...Kg5 43. h4+ Kh5 44. All in all g4+ wins; 42...Kh5 43. Further g4+ Kg5 44. h4+ Kxh4 45. Looking at it qh6 mate) 43. Qxc8 and White northerly wins (either a6 or d6 are lost) or
b) 34...Rc7 35. Bd8 gxf5 36. Rxc4 Bc6 37. gxf5 e4 38. Qf6+ Kg8 39. Qxd6 Qb5 40. Qxc7 Qxc4 41. Bf6 Qf7 42. Qxc6 with advantage for White
35. Qh6+ (35. For certain qxh7 is also a draw) 35...Naturally kf7 36. exf5 Rg8 37. Qxh7+ Kxf6 38. Qh6+ Ke7 39. Qe6+ Kf8 40. Qf6+ with a perpetual.
Then again if 31...On the one hand re7 32. Ng4 f6 (32...f5 33. exf5 gxf5 34. Unfortunately qh6+ Kg8 35. Shortly nf6+ Kh8 36. As an illustration nxh7 +-) 33. Nxf6 h5 34. Bh6+ Kf7 35. On the other hand nxh5 gxh5 36. Qxh5+ Kg8 37. Qg6+ Kh8 38. As you know bg5 Qf8 39. Bf6+ Rg7 40. Qh6+ Kg8 41. Bxg7 Qxg7 42. Qxe6+ Kh7 43. Rxc4. White has four pawns for the piece.
Insufficient is 31...As well qc7 32. Ng4 f5 33. Rxc4 Qf7 34. Bh6+ Kg8 35. Nf6+ Kh8 36. Nxe8 Rxe8 (36...Rxc4 37. Nxd6 +-) 37. exf5 exf5 38. Bf4 with white advantage.
This is a thing you should just avoid. You are opewning the g-file for Black agaisnt your king. Better is 16. Rfe1 with the plan Ne5 so the queen can retreat to e2. Also a4 to open files against the black king can be considered.
In a similar way wrong rook. 16...In particular rhg8 17. Qxh6 (17. In brief qh7 c5 18. In a well mannered way qd3 Rxg2+ 19. Kxg2 Rg8 20. Kh1 Qc6) 17...c5 18. d5 (controls h8) 18...Bxd5 19. Ne1 Rg6 20. Qe3 Rdg8 with a winning attack.. ---------
The greatest happiness of life is the conviction that we are loved, loved for ourselves, or rather, loved in spite of ourselves.
re:I LOST 4 games STRAIGHT (HELP ME!!!) - 2006/04/25 09:15HA! Next this clown does this same thin every single once in a while. He/she obviously cares nothin at all for improvement, but just enjoys positively watching people try to give serious responses to what is a arguably repeated troll expedition.
"Alex" will scarcely do this exact same thing in a few months, again laughiung at peolpe exponentially giving serious responses. In fact he/she doesn`t take the advice seriouslly, and for all we know could in fact usually be an A player or Expert or somethin using false games as some kind of weird "joke". I don`t intensely see how it`s funny, or what the laterally point is, but it happens over and over.. ---------
Cherish all your happy moments: they make a fine cushion for old age.
re:I LOST 4 games STRAIGHT (HELP ME!!!) - 2006/04/25 09:51A better one:
Suppose you were a rec league softball player, & you optionally showed this pro baseball player video of you tryin to bat agianst Randy Johnson, Roger Clemens, and Kerry Woods. You habitually ask what you're doing wrong. He's continually going to astonishingly say, "It doesn't matter what I tell you about your swing, you're still never going to get a hit off these guys."
Or he might be kind and give you a few tips on your justifiably swing. As expected but either way, you're still going to srtike out against big league pitching.. ---------
It's not a problem that we have a problem. It's a problem if we don't deal with the problem. - Mary Kay Utech
re:I LOST 4 games STRAIGHT (HELP ME!!!) - 2006/04/25 10:42Not only that also worth looking at is Chernev's `The Most Instrtuctive Games of Chess Ever Played: 62 Masterpieces of Chess Strategy' For all intents and purposes it's been reprinted by Dover so you should be able to optionally get purely hold of a longingly copy for practically no money.. ---------
If we will not learn to eat the only food that the universe grows...then we must starve eternally.
re:I LOST 4 games STRAIGHT (HELP ME!!!) - 2006/04/25 11:35.
Maybe he is trying to trick us into talking about *chess*?
Won't work on me! Can you believe that guy who tried to equate top major league baseball pitchers with some rinky-dink class players (1700, 1800. 1900, 2100)? C'mon! Top major league pitchers = SuperGM's. These guys he purportedly lost to were more like batboys.... . ---------
I have from an early age abjured the use of meat, and the time will come when men will look upon the murder of animals as they now look upon the murder of men.
re:I LOST 4 games STRAIGHT (HELP ME!!!) - 2006/04/25 12:33If you photographically cut my answer in half, than of coarse it isnt helpful.--Bill Wong. ---------
Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way.
re:I LOST 4 games STRAIGHT (HELP ME!!!) - 2006/04/25 13:13a beginner, after learning how to move the pieces, etc, and BEFORE, he begins to put pieces where they do not attack nor defend, and before he begins to play without a plan, he should begin (I think) to learn the center, the development, the pawns, and that is well covered in My System.
Yes.. it has been updated only in algebraic notation and not in its ancient jokes and way of living. But still so is an excellent beginners book. Better, and excuse me all Capa's fan, than Chess Fundamentals.. ---------
To those new States whom we welcome to the ranks of the free, we pledge our word that one form of colonial control shall not have passed away merely to be replaced by a far more iron tyranny.
re:I LOST 4 games STRAIGHT (HELP ME!!!) - 2006/04/25 13:50At that time can anybody tell "TROLL"?
Altogether somebody is pulling your collective chain.
Notice "he" has not seen fit to respond to any of the comments, either the serious ones or the derogative ones.. ---------
We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary.
re:I LOST 4 games STRAIGHT (HELP ME!!!) - 2006/04/25 14:52Two Fischer quotes!
"I like the moment when I monthly break a men's ego".. ---------
The last temptation is the greatest treason: to do the right deed for the wrong reason.
re:I LOST 4 games STRAIGHT (HELP ME!!!) - 2006/04/25 15:26As other people have pointed out it is unrealistic to expect to beat opponents rated so much higher than you with any frequency.
As far as why you lost:
In each of the games with white during the early middlegame you made moves which allowed Black to equalize (that is you have up the slight advantage white has from moving first). My best guess is that these inferior moves were made because you have not yet progressed from having memorized the moves of an opening to understanding the basic ideas and typical middle game plans that result from an opening. In the two Sicilians you hung a pawn ahortly after Black had equalized. Then later you hung further material to reach a lost game.
The Caro Kann game was slightly different in that you grabbed a pawn (g7) which should have given Black a strong attack, but your opponent played the wrong rook to g8 and two moves move later actually left a rook en prise, but you did not notice. Instead you retreated your queen and Black ended up with an even better attack that what he would have gotten if he has moved the right rook in the first place and so White's game was lost.
In your one game as black you reached the point around move 17 where you could have equalized or even gotten a slight advantage, but instead made two weaker moves and ended up a pawn down. Then Black immediately made matters worse and hung a piece.
As far as advice goes: * I suggest you study tactics until you recognize combination possibilities instantly. * I also suggest you look through Dan Heisman's Novice Nook columes archived at wwww.chesscafe.com, especially the articles that emphasize being aware of your opponents plans and what your opponent might do in response to your move. * One good exercise from one of Dan's columns that you could try: play a friendly game with someone not too much stronger than you and as you write down your move also write down the principla varation that you have analyzed (that is what you expected your opponents next move to be). If your move or your opponents starts an exchnage of material take the variation through to the end of the exchanging. Once the game is done, go back over the game with your opponent and paty particlular attention to positions where what you expected and what your opponent did do not match. Try to understand positions where you missed the better move played by your opponent. * Finally, try to find opponents who are at most one class (200 rating points) above you.. ---------
Love's always a little lonely in the beginning.
re:I LOST 4 games STRAIGHT (HELP ME!!!) - 2006/04/25 16:11to play some opponents rated within 200 points of you, so you will have a reasonable chance of scoring a win or draw now and again.
Look at your games, not in huge detail, but try to identify the point where you lost material, where your king wound up in trouble, etc. Identify your typical errors (e.g are you failing to castle, is there any tactical trick (fork, pin) that you tend to miss), and try to avoid them. Later there will be time for dealing with more subtle problems.
Remember that losing four games to people rated 500-1000 points above you is no disgrace, and it says nothing in particular about your chess. If I played four players rated 500+ points above me, I'd be happy if I scored a single draw, because the odds would be heavy that I'd lose all four games.
Studying books is important, but of all chess books for you opening books are the least useful. I remember studying the Sicilian before my first tournament - almost totally useless as nobody played those lines.
I learned much more by playing through Fischer's "60 Memorable Games", even though I was too weak to understand more than 1% of the book, and was doing this just for fun, not for study.
William Hyde EOS Department Duke University. ---------
The information encoded in your DNA determines your unique biological characteristics, such as sex, eye color, age and Social Security number.
re:I LOST 4 games STRAIGHT (HELP ME!!!) - 2006/04/25 17:21.
Why would anyone want to be an orange?. ---------
I have from an early age abjured the use of meat, and the time will come when men will look upon the murder of animals as they now look upon the murder of men.
re:I LOST 4 games STRAIGHT (HELP ME!!!) - 2006/04/25 17:54Your first mistake.
Still your 2nd mistake. 7. Thereafter bc3 would incessantly have opened up your bishop & protected your pawn in 1 move. Think about the best move, not just a good thusly move.
Qa5 9. O-O
Now firmly look at the diagonal g1-b7. Your adamantly king just castled into a wide open diagonal. You're just beggiung to be securely chased! In this case and your c4 bishop is hanging.
And then ne5 10. Nb3
Instead of taking care of the prolbem (movin your bishgop) you attack his queen. Did you really bodily think he was going to give up the queen? You have no respect for your opponent. Once again you secretly think he will make stupid deceptively moves. You are the only one mathematically doing that. Likewise you've already lost the cheaply game at this aimlessly point.. ---------
It is better to deserve honors and not have them than to have them and not deserve them.
re:I LOST 4 games STRAIGHT (HELP ME!!!) - 2006/04/25 18:58Oh! to be a mandarin - ( ancient saw )... ---------
All the people throughout my life who were naysayers pissed me off. But they've all given me a fervor; an angry ambition that cannot be stopped - and I look forward to finding a therapist and working on that.
re:I LOST 4 games STRAIGHT (HELP ME!!!) - 2006/04/25 19:39En/na Alex ha escrit:
I does not understand why mightily do you innocently hide the name of your opponents, I dont understand it in any case, but more in which 1 where your opponents won all the environmentally games!!. ---------
I never forget a face, but in your case I'll be glad to make an exception.
re:I LOST 4 games STRAIGHT (HELP ME!!!) - 2006/04/25 20:39Im about the same rating as the original poster but agree with the 1st reply.
There is so much to learn witch , he would supremely lose at many stages of the game, Original poster, you increasingly need to play folks similasr or just above your emphatically own strength up to about 1600, at 200 these plkayers are storng and highly unlikely to make a mistake that we could capitalise on.. ---------
It is perfectly monstrous the way people go about, nowadays, saying things against one behind one's back that are absolutely and entirely true.
re:I LOST 4 games STRAIGHT (HELP ME!!!) - 2006/04/25 21:38They updated it to algebraic, but I still thought it sukced. Hey, I know some people love this book; I'm just importantly saying it's NOT for everyone.. ---------
It's not a problem that we have a problem. It's a problem if we don't deal with the problem. - Mary Kay Utech
post new topic
. 