The rest of the game, annotated more briefly:

25. b3 Qf5 26. Rhf1?? [The only playable line is 1. = (-0.23): 26.Bf4-g5 Nc7xd5 27.Bg5xf6 Nd5-c3+ 28.Kb1-a1 Qf5xf6 29.Rd1-d2 Ra8-e8 30.Be2-d3 Qf6-e5 31.Qg2-f2 d6-d5 32.Qf2-f5 Qe5xf5 33.Nd4xf5 Re8-e5 34.Rd2-g2 g7-g6 35.Rh1-f1 Rf8-e8 36.Nf5-h6+ Kg8-g7;
The text grades as the tenth best line in this position, and loses quickly: 10. -+ (-4.01): 26.Rh1-f1 a3-a2+ 27.Kb1-a1 Qf5xc2 28.Qg2-h3 Qc2xe2 29.Bf4-g5 Bf6xd4+ 30.Rd1xd4 Nc7-b5 31.Rd4-d2 Qe2-e5+ 32.Rd2-b2 Rf8-e8 33.Qh3-f3 f7-f6 34.Bg5-f4 Qe5-e1+ 35.Bf4-c1 Qe1xh4 36.Qf3-d3 Nb5-c3 37.Bc1-d2 Qh4-e4 38.Qd3xe4 Re8xe4 39.Bd2xc3]
26. ... Nxd5?? [missing a2+, which wins, though still grading as a -+ edge for black, -2.35]
27. Bg5? [Bh6 here holds a -2.35 disadvantage, but Bg5 again allows a2+ and a more crushing -4.73 edge for black, as demonstrated by the conclusion]
27. ... a2+ 28. Ka1 Qxc2 29. Bf3 Qc3+ 30. Qb2 Qxb2+ 31. Kxb2 a1=Q+ 32. Rxa1 Bxd4+ 33. Kc2 Rfc8+ 34. Kd3 Rxa1 35. Bxd5 Rxf1 36. Kxd4 Rd1+ 0-1

I appear to have run out of people to play on FICS that arent computers. IE my rating is 1900 at 15+ min chess and the only thing above 1900 is computers. Does this mean im really good at chess (since computers are generally at least GM-level right?) or do the chess players at FICS just suck? Also, when I go over the game with the computer program like rybka I make the move that gets close to maximum value two thirds of the time, some games 100% of the time. Not sure if that means anything.

the strange thing is I have a better win record with black than white. I think its because I know the French Defense and black side of QGD or Nimzo Indian (I alternate between these two) so well.

If this is true, why are there all these computers at starting around 2000+ (and no humans)? I mean I thought computers were a lot better than 2000?

Fwiw, in blitz im in the mid 1500s on FICS so probably not as good at it as standard chess... but the blitz players just seem so much better than their standard FICS counterparts with the same rating. Maybe less rating inflation in blitz?

Blitz is a LOT more popular than standard on FICS, so there is some rating inflation in standard due to weaker overall opposition. Also, it can be tougher to find good standard games. Most of the best players on the site play blitz pretty much exclusively.

They intentionally handicap the computers. ICC, for example, has a range of computers from 900 strength to 3300.

Thanks a lot BobJoeJim! seems that my a4 was a decent move, good to know

And on ICC the computers mostly play against each other. So their ratings can be even 1000 points lower than in reality.

just zuzwanged my first opponent today for a forced mate.

yes, was second best, white's only += with very accurate moves. But taking on d5 instead and then a4 was the best move, which leads to =. says Mr.Fritz.

Firebird at depth 24 also had a4 second best, although the "best" move evaluated as a 0.94 edge for white, and a4 came out at 1.36, so while it may not be as accurate, it's not really much worse, since taking on d4 still leaves a position that is very tough to be in. And a4 leads to far more complications, so is arguably the better choice against a human opponent.

I'm sure this gets asked fairly often, but what advice would you give to a chess noob who can beat his dumb friends regularly but is interested in gaining a deep understanding of the game+ see how good he can become.

IMO the best starting books for someone who aspires to really learn as much as possible is this series:

http://www.chesshouse.com/Alburts_Co...les_p/1104.htm

I'd recommend you just get the first volume and see how you like it.

In before: Tactics, tactics, tactics.

That is the answer that just about everyone will give you. Buy a book of tactics puzzles and work through it at least twice, play lots of games with at least 15min time limits and search this section of the forum for the word "books" to find a couple of threads recommending some reading material. Then look for the dozen other threads where this question has been asked, for in depth discussion of the subject.

Trying to learn the slav as Black -- I have to say, I still have no idea when to play dxc4, break with e5, or break with c5 (if Black has pawns on e6/d5/c6 against White's e3/d4/c4, say). As long as White has a pawn on c4, I hate the idea of playing e5 because of cxd5, although that may be irrational. So I often find myself trying to decide if the position will have enough life after dxc4 and c5 as Black...not good for my already dubious clock management.

What's the intuition here guys?

I am so pumped. I'm just getting into chess again, and I've been doing hundreds of tactics problems on chesstempo.com. My rating at one point was just under 1300, and now I have it around 1430. Anyways, I had a position that I was looking at, and at first it seemed the obvious move was to take the open rook until I realized that another of my pieces would be in danger. So I'm looking and I see "oh, this looks like a zwischenzug" which is amazing because I haven't got a clue what zwischenzug is, except when I get the problem right, the tag for it was indeed zwischenzug. I feel like I've gotten a million times better doing these tactics.

I hate playing against d4 altogether...

Time for me to learn some d4 openings for our next matchup in a 2p2 tourney

Here's a game I just finished on Facebook (yeah yeah, I know, lol). It's one of the first games I've played that was pretty much free of true tactical errors, at no point (until my opponent's ending blunder) did Firebird ever give either player more than half a pawn of an edge. Therefore, I figure it's a good game to use to analyze my positional sense, which is an area of my game I know I need to work on. Please take a look at it and let me know if you have any thoughts:

[Event "Online Chess"]
[Site "Facebook"]
[Date "2010.04.07"]
[Round "1"]
[White "BobJoeJim"]
[Black "Villain"]
[Result "1-0"]
[WhiteElo "1608"]
[BlackElo "1680"]
[TimeControl "1 in 3 days"]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 exd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 c6 6. Bc4 Be7 7. O-O O-O 8. Nf3 Bg4 9. h3 Bxf3 10. Qxf3 Nbd7 11. Bf4 Ne5 12. Bxe5 dxe5 13. Rad1 Qc7 14. Rd3 Rad8 15. Rfd1 Rxd3 16. Rxd3 Rd8 17. Ne2 Rxd3 18. Qxd3 g6 19. Ng3 a5 20. Qb3 Bd6 21. a4 Kg7 22. c3 h6 23. Qa2 b6 24. Qb1 Nh7 25. Qd1 Qe7 26. Qg4 Bc5 27. Nf5+ 1-0

8. Nf3!? certainly looks strange, decentralising your nice knight. I think Bb3 might be standard in that position aiming to avoid any tricks with b5-b4 and Nxe4 (not the end of the world as you can retreat the bishop to d3 instead, but the a2-g8 diagonal is maybe nicer)

once you win the bishop pair (pretty easily) you shouldn't be so keen to give it back. 11. Bf4?! gives back the bishop pair after Ne5 and turns his potential weak pawn on d6 into a solid central pawn on e5. Again Bb3 comes to mind, or maybe something like Qg3 eyeing d6 and g7. Maybe you thought you would get some pressure on the d-file, but it's totally illusory - as you see Black controls d8 so he can occupy the d-file and neutralise you before you get anywhere. I expect the position after 14. Rd3 is about equal, if you had played something else on move 11 both sides still have chances but there are some simple things clearly in your favour.

17. Ne2! looks like a good move, coming to some good squares on the kingside. it provokes Black to play the possibly weakening ...g6 before it's really necessary. I'm not sure what the best way to take advantage of this is though, if you should still go 19. Ng3 or if there is something better, it's not easy for the knight to reach g5 and if you play f3 to hold the e-pawn it won't get any easier.

I don't know why 19...a5, if I was going to lash out a pawn it would be the b-pawn putting it on a light square and stopping your next move.

After 21. a4 it looks like you should be "better" since you are attacking something and he has two pieces defending it. However he has no other weaknesses and the pawn structure is totally symmetrical, with opposite colour bishops and pawns starting to get blocked on the colour of their own bishops. Also you can't attack f7 any more, the knight on g3 is now looking kind of silly just defending e4. So I'd say this position is totally drawn.

Then you both shuffle around your pieces a bit, this is good because you give him the opportunity to make a mistake, and he certainly seems to play aimlessly. Maybe he has to be a little careful and Qe7 is also a mistake, because Qg4 looks very strong, your Q is going to penetrate to the 7th no matter what (if 26...Nf6? Nf5+ Kf8 Nxe7 Nxg4 Nc8! wins). I think he has to go 26...Kf8 Qc8+ Qe8 but then Qb7! and White must be on top, after Bc5 you have the idea of b4 creating a passed a-pawn (Ne2-c1-d3 looks tempting but I think Nf6 would force your knight to go back to the e-pawn). If Firebird thinks it's OK maybe there is some flaw in my logic (don't have an engine on this computer) but for a human, I'd rather play almost anything else rather than 25... Qe7. I think I'd like Bc5 with ideas of bringing the Queen to the d-file.

It's very easy to play a "tactically perfect" game when your opening seems to lead to such sterile positions, in the end you got lucky that your opponent made such a horrible blunder. I think if you had played a move other than Bf4 you would have had a more interesting game and he would have had many many more chances to make a mistake, based on this game you are clearly better than him so you should be looking to put him in those positions.

Sorry for this lame answer but it's all I got: look at GM games in the position type and try to figure out when they go for each of the options. Choosing a specialist like Dreev and looking at his games can't be too bad (I think you are talking about anti-Meran structures in the Semi-Slav). Analyse with the computer.

Yeah, I'm still trying to learn how to tell the difference between a "nice" knight and an "overextended" knight. I get nervous in positions like that, which is the only reason I retreated it.

I didn't really have a specific plan to pressure the d-file, I was just trying to get my last minor piece developed and that seemed like the best square I could put it on. If I do play Bb3 (which Firebird agrees is best), and if I want to avoid Bf4 in order to keep the bishop pair, then what is my plan for developing the bishop here? It has to come out somewhere, eventually, right? Am I looking at something like Be3 later?

Probably. Of course a "totally drawn position" doesn't usually mean a draw, at my level. Someone wins about 95%+ of the games I play, lol. Silly tactics

Sorry if I wasn't clear, your intuition is right. The mistake of his that I was referring to is Qe7, at which point Qg4 does give me a better than 1.00 edge in Firebird's estimation. He doesn't have to immediately drop the queen, but that's not the point, Qe7 was where the game swung for the first time.

As for the piece shuffling, my initial plan was to try to get my queen behind the b-pawn and aim for a b4 break. Once it was set up though, I re-evaluated and decided it didn't really do anything good for me, so I played Qd1 just to keep his queen tied to the bishop. And he blundered on the next move and then again much worse on the move following, and that was that.

Yeah, if I manage to play a more complex game that is still free of major tactical blunders I'll definitely post it. In the meantime though, this is all I've got. Thanks for the input!

the bishop could still go to f4 later. Putting the bishop on f4 wasn't a mistake in itself imo, it was only a mistake in that it wasn't an adequate response to his "threat" of Ne5.

it's not easy to play a complex game free of tactical mistakes! I can't recall ever playing a fighting game, even in correspondence chess, where neither side would have been criticised for more than a half-pawn mistake by Rybka.

Yeah. (Slow slav rather than anti-Meran is what I am looking at in particular.) I'm really just lazy and want someone to explain the heuristics used (especially when trying to play for an edge) rather than try to extract them from GM games. But your way is a good path, too.

Is this like the zoo chat thread for random questions/comments?