Let's talk about Chess baby

44,438 Views | 311 Replies | Last: 15 days ago by Rongagin71
Star Wars Memes Only
How long do you want to ignore this user?
(Admit it, you sang the song in your head a little)

This is a continuation from a conversation Astro and I were having in the Who invented logic thread. I decided to create another thread so as to not further hijack the other one.

So I thought you played pretty well. Quite a bit better than I expected given you've only been playing for a week. I'm going to give you my commentary without looking at a computer, because you can use that as well as me and I think it taints the human perspective. That being said, some of my commentary may be wrong as I might have missed some tactic that the computer sees.

One of the ways computers have revolutionized Chess is to show that a lot of openings which were long considered subpar or even broken are in fact playable. I would imagine 2...d5 is like that. I haven't seen it before, but I doubt it's bad. 3... dxc4 looks subpar to me as it hands white the center and it doesn't look like black can hold the extra pawn.

You stated 4 ...e5 was good, and it took me a little bit to catch why. In light of it, maybe white should have played 4. e3 instead. It's pretty thematic to play that in queen's gambit games, and is probably good here for the same reasons. It's one of those moves where you have to check a few lines to make sure it works. e6 looks like another solid move to me. Locking in your light-squared bishop is not usually bad in closed positions, and it gives you a pretty solid pawn structure. It's an alternative I think. Do you like the closed-game style of play?. In my opinion it's pretty strong and a lot of moves come more "naturally," whatever that means.

As was demonstrated in the game 4... Bg4 is probably weak because it allows 5. f3 which consolidates white center. It also forces your bishop to retreat to either h5, where it's basically taken out of the game, or forces you to retreat to d7 where you could have just placed your bishop in the first place. Probably always a good idea to check tempo-gaining moves your opponent has right after your turn. That said, it does make the g1-a7 diagonal pretty weak, especially if black decides to castle that way. If black castles kingside after that he'll probably want to use an extra turn to get the King tucked away safely on h1.

One of the things I like to do, especially in long games, is to check all ranks, files, and diagonals along the square my opponent moved a piece from and the square he moves a piece to. I like to look at all the square one knight move away from those two squares to. I do the same thing before I move any piece of my own -- just a quick glance. It helps me understand many relevant details on how a particular move changes the structure of the board, and also helps me immediately see a lot of tactical ideas that I can then tuck away into the back of my mind and try to make them relevant. Once you get used to the process you would probably immediately see a tempo gaining move like 5. f3 and might have reconsidered 4... Bg4.

After 8. Nge2 it looks like white does intend on castling kingside. It might be a good time to strike at that diagonal we talked about earlier with 8 ...c5. Even if he doesn't castle, it'll be good to break up those pawns in the center. Note that white can't play something like 9. d5 because of 9... Qh4+ forking the king and bishop. After the fork yea, white will get your light squared bishop too, but the bishop you're getting is probably far superior to the one you're losing. That f3 is really a double edged sword sometimes. Also, note that after 8... Bg4 you give black an extra tempo by abandoning g7 since if black takes with his knight he takes it with check. Therefore, after some calculation it looks like c5 is no longer immediately possible after white castles due to a line like 9...c5 10. Nf4 cxd4 11. Nxh5 dxc3 12. Nxg7+. If instead 9...c5 10. Nf4 Bg6 then 11. d5 is possible as that queen check is no longer available. Of course all of this analysis is just to check whether that c5 pawn advance is good or not. I think the analysis may be good to look at for tactical ideas, but something like a well-timed pawn push to break up a strong pawn majority is the key idea here. Opening up that diagonal also gives you a very strong avenue to build an attack.

I don't like 10... g6 at all. It weakens f6 and h6, and after 11. Nxh5 gxh5 black probably has a winning endgame with the bishop pair and the better pawn structure. I get that you get to open up the g-file, but 10... Bg6 11. Nxg6 hxg6 allows you to open up a pretty powerful attack down the h-file too, have a much better pawn structure, and allows you to retain the option of castling kingside. After Nf4 white looks like he probably has some sac ideas on e6 too. However, note that the d4 pawn is very weak here due to the King being on that diagonal. The queen can't protect it because of the potential bishop pin. It's an idea to tuck away I think and maybe play towards.

12. Bh6 looks useless to me. I think white should have used this opportunity to play Kh1. You can take the d4 pawn here if you want it as far as I can tell.

After 16. Rd1 the hole on f6 and the centralized king is a huge liability for you. Wherever you move your queen white can send his knight to that square and basically has you in a vice.

Nice job in seeing his blunder though.

A few take-aways:

  • Castle your king asap!
  • f3 leads to good attacking ideas. Look for tactics! On the other hand, if you're the one castled kingside and your f-pawn is not on the rank right in front of your king, consider moving to h1/h8 to blunt those tactical ideas. I won a game a couple of weeks ago where I was otherwise down positionally by exploiting this diagonal.
  • g6 potentially leaves h6 and f6 very weak.

Personally, I would also say to avoid trading central pawns for flank pawns/ less central pawns, but there are some openings where you want to do that. But in general I think that's probably also a good principle.

I enjoyed your game, and I think you have a knack for it.
Solo Tetherball Champ
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quote:

(Admit it, you sang the song in your head a little)


SoulSlaveAG2005
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Checkers > chess
Woody2006
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
SoulSlaveAG2005 said:

Checkers > chess

Connect4 > checkers
SoulSlaveAG2005
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Woody2006 said:

SoulSlaveAG2005 said:

Checkers > chess

Connect4 > checkers


Chutes & ladders > Connect4
swimmerbabe11
How long do you want to ignore this user?
What about the little game with the golf tees at cracker barrel? Are you eg-no-ra-moose?
Star Wars Memes Only
How long do you want to ignore this user?
swimmerbabe11 said:

What about the little game with the golf tees at cracker barrel? Are you eg-no-ra-moose?


**** that game. No, seriously, **** that game. It makes me feel ******ed.
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
swimmerbabe11
How long do you want to ignore this user?
While you might as well have been speaking in Lithuanian in the OP,

I am the BOMB.COM at the peg game. Which, does indeed make you an eg-na-ma-roose...and me a genius!

(also, I literally lol'd at this)
The Hefty Lefty
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Star Wars Memes Only
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AstroAg17 said:

Post one of your games.

Here's the most recent game I played. It was a 10/3. I was black.

1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Bg5 Be7
5. Nf3 O-O 6. e3 c5 7. cxd5 Nxd5 8. Nxd5 Bxg5
9. Nxg5 Qxd5 10. Nf3 Nc6 11. Rc1 Qxa2 12. Bd3 cxd4
13. exd4 Qxb2 14. O-O Qb4 15. Rc5 f5 16. Rb5 Qd6
17. Re1 Nxd4 18. Nxd4 Qxd4 19. Qb3 a6 20. Rbe5 b5
21. Bxf5 Kh8 1-0
Star Wars Memes Only
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AstroAg17 said:

Non-computer thoughts: Why didn't you play 15. Nxd4? If Rc4, you trade knights with check and your queen escapes and you've won a pawn. I also really don't like f5. I'm assuming you're stopping the battery after he plays Qc2, but it weakens your e pawn a ton. The battery is a bad idea on his part anyways, since now Nxd4 then trading knights with check forces him to ruin his king's protection and opens his g file.

Why did you resign? I don't see how he can take your pawn. Kh8 stopped his attack. If he plays bishop takes pawn, you have back row checkmate. If he plays anything else takes pawn, you win the exchange. So your pawn is safe, and you're going to have chances to win his bishop I think.

Computer aided thoughts: taking the pawn with the knight was good. You apparently weren't going to win his bishop, but the computer says your position is much better because of the connected pass pawns I assume.

Obviously I wouldn't have seen those things in a blitz game or even a rapid game. Maybe with a 30 minute time control. If I was playing I would have given away all my pieces in the opening.

No joke, I just played a game as black where I played 1. e4 c5 2. Bc4 Nc6 3. Qh5 Ne5??????

I'm improving though. Barring the occasional move like that, I've been eating <1100 players for breakfast lately.

Sorry, the pgn should have read 0-1, not 1-0.

I thought about 15... Nxd4 for a while, but in the interest of time I was not able to calculate everything out as extensively as I would have liked before playing that move. It looked risky, because if I play that white has 16. Bxh7+ Kxh7 17. Ng5+ and the king has to come to g6 otherwise checkmate is coming. I didn't like the idea of having my King so exposed without checking everything extensively. f5 was played to prevent that threat, but Nxd4 is probably better. I wasn't a huge fan of f5 at the time either, but I figured being up two pawns, I could afford to make my e-pawn backwards. He would have to expend some time in taking it, and I would still be up a pawn, with pretty good position if it went to the endgame. That was my thinking anyway, don't know if it's right.

If I could do it again, I would have probably just played h6 which also stops the threat. I'm still not sure if Bxh7+ is a legitimate threat so I'd probably still not play Nxd4.

"I'm improving though. Barring the occasional move like that, I've been eating <1100 players for breakfast lately."

Nice!
SoulSlaveAG2005
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I know I kid about checkers > chess. But in all honesty this is how I feel my face looks when I try to read this thread...



You dudes/dudettes are too dang smart for me on this game..
Star Wars Memes Only
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Don't feel bad, stuff like 1. e4 c5 2. Bc4 Nc6 3. Qh5 can be pretty tricky. I'll still fall for these kind of stupid things from time to time. It's yet another reason I prefer more closed systems -- people usually can't get you with quick traps. There are only two real candidate moves that prevent mate I think, 3... g6 or e6. The concern is you're going to drop the c-pawn. The knight move you did both prevents dropping the c-pawn and the mate! Oops, it loses the knight. It's a natural, logical kind of oversight, and it shows clear thinking I think, even if you do overlook hanging a piece. It does take a little time to see that e6 solves all of your problems.
Post removed:
by user
Star Wars Memes Only
How long do you want to ignore this user?
If I recall correctly the fried liver is a line that's played after e5, so e6 is not possible right?
Post removed:
by user
Star Wars Memes Only
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Heh, I suspect you would find most of my games pretty boring.
Ulrich
How long do you want to ignore this user?
How much do you two focus on areas/vectors of control versus the sort of bottoms up "check all the rows, files, diagonals, and knight moves (another music pun!)" analysis or simulating options?

I never really learned the game, so I end up switching back and forth between the 30,000 foot view and mentally simulating my best options out ~4 moves to see what the board looks like. Both lead to stupid mistakes; most of my games are slaughters one way or the other and it usually seems to depend on whether I hang a critical piece or get my queen in more trouble than I can get it out of. Obviously spending more time checking for that sort of thing would help, but there's only so much time between moves. So where is the balance?

A note on how I play against good players:
I make up for my lack of technical ability with aggression, often getting my bishops to b2 and/or g2 and using e4 to get my queen out too early and either bust open one side or get behind the defense. Thanks to the element of surprise, it works more often than it should. More importantly, it works more often than I would win playing right. A lot of my problems would probably go away if I invested the time to be good enough to play conventionally though.
Post removed:
by user
Star Wars Memes Only
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Ulrich said:

How much do you two focus on areas/vectors of control versus the sort of bottoms up "check all the rows, files, diagonals, and knight moves (another music pun!)" analysis or simulating options?

I never really learned the game, so I end up switching back and forth between the 30,000 foot view and mentally simulating my best options out ~4 moves to see what the board looks like. Both lead to stupid mistakes; most of my games are slaughters one way or the other and it usually seems to depend on whether I hang a critical piece or get my queen in more trouble than I can get it out of. Obviously spending more time checking for that sort of thing would help, but there's only so much time between moves. So where is the balance?

A note on how I play against good players:
I make up for my lack of technical ability with aggression, often getting my bishops to b2 and/or g2 and using e4 to get my queen out too early and either bust open one side or get behind the defense. Thanks to the element of surprise, it works more often than it should. More importantly, it works more often than I would win playing right. A lot of my problems would probably go away if I invested the time to be good enough to play conventionally though.

The way I use it, the "check all ranks, files, diagonals, and knight moves" strategy is subservient to more positional ideas. I want to know the tactical ideas in the position, and make sure I'm not missing anything, which is all that I use the checking ranks, files, etc for. But all of that is just to make sure that the plan I'm executing is sound. When I make a concerted effort to do this, my rating immediately shoots up 100 points.

Having a pawn on e4 with a bishop on g2 to adopt an aggressive strategy seems counterintuitive to me, so I'd love to see this in action.
Ulrich
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yeah, that's a typo. I meant e3, but either way that pawn is almost always my first move. I play e4 against players who are worse than me or better players who have already seen my Banzai attack. As you alluded to, once the pawn is in e4 that bishop can't do as much. I have attacked hard out of e4, but it takes more setup and my odds decrease the longer the openings develop, if that's even terminology that makes sense.
Post removed:
by user
Duncan Idaho
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AstroAg17 said:



This person isn't actually a human.


That is probably the dumbest I have felt in a very long time. He is starting a new game before I even realize he won the last one.
Star Wars Memes Only
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Apparently there is an IM on chess.com whose bullet rating has surpassed both Nakamura and Carlsen by playing nothing but ten second games.
Post removed:
by user
Star Wars Memes Only
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yea, it's amazing that some of these guys are playing games in 15 seconds. The quality of the games at that speed is pretty bad, but if you up it to a minute they actually even play fairly good quality games. It really is pretty amazing.
Agristotle
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Some amazing games in the US Chess Championship, just completed a couple of hours ago. Women's championship was won yesterday with a queen sac leading to forced mate in 5, really beautiful.
Rongagin71
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I played fourth board on the 1971 Aggie chess team, my highest rating was 1939.
Have not played much until a year ago when I retired and started playing on "Dr Chess", where their inflated rating system has me at 2071.
Would like to play some Aggies on the internet if you can tell me where...
Seems like the Chess Committee no longer hosts the annual Brazos Open or San Jacinto Open?
Star Wars Memes Only
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Wow, that's pretty strong. I play on chess.com or Lichess if you're ever up for a game. Hopefully I can offer you a challenge.
Rongagin71
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I'm a fish compared to really strong players - the highest rated player that I knew at A&M was a math prof from England named Roger Smith, he was +2400...Next was Hungarian economics Prof Pejovich (2360) who designed A&M's chess computer program that competed in the World Championship in early 70's.
Dr Djuric, Meteorology Prof, should be mentioned for his sponsorship of Aggie chess over two decades.
Post removed:
by user
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.