This wasn't a mistake in itself (though the individual moves could have been more accurate). The first king's knight move was a natural developing move, the second an obligatory recapture, the third a material-winning fork, and the fourth a check. Moving the same piece repeatedly is usually only a mistake when doing so loses tempi.

Another exception to the "don't move the same piece twice in the opening" guideline: piece repositionings are "book" in many opening lines, especially in closed and semi-closed positions. It's typical in the closed Ruy for White to play Nb1-d2-f1-g3 or -e3 in positions like this:

True

for my 10. move I have a mobile queen, queenside bishop, kingside rook (with protected king), decent knights and a possible pawn fork to open up some space if I want

he has essentially the same knights I have with one decent bishop and legitimately little else, with a wide open king that can't go anywhere

I looked at 3 or 4 moves here - Bg5 interested me in how it limited any sort of development, Nxd6 obviously puts a lot of pressure on and doubles the queen pawn, e5 opens up all types of tactics, even Nd5 is an ****show for black

10. any of these moves seems like I'm at a huge advantage and should be quite aggressive with that advantage

and regarding rei's statement on qxd6, I realized it was safe at the time, but I felt I was missing something advancing my queen that far so early

I got ascared at all the books saying "don't bring out the queen early pins skewers tactics oh my!"

Bringing the queen out "early" generally means before you've gotten your minor pieces developed and castled. At this point it's move 10, and you're pretty well developed. I wouldn't consider it premature here... especially since the tactics favor it (you can win a pawn immediately, and the queen can't be trapped on d6). Remember, the advice about not bringing your queen out is sound, BUT it's also bad to bring your queen out too late. She's your most powerful piece, and if you don't use her (when it's safe to do so) you'll miss a lot of good opportunities.

As for what's "too early" and what's "too late" versus "just right", well, that's just a matter of experience, tactical understanding, etcetera etcetera.

Bg5 just loses your otherwise strong knight. It does some collateral damage like ruin his 0-0 castling prospect. Not really sure it's worth it. He can maybe get his bishop to e7 so his knight isn't pinned to the Queen but then his Queen can't really breathe at all and he has no shot at 0-0-0 castling anytime soon. It's a thought but it feels like it's too early to just donate such a strong piece. It's pretty rare that your position will be so strong that you can donate a piece and still win. Especially after 9 moves.

Nxd6 wins you a pawn and it's certainly not too early to get your queen out to d6.

Not sure what e5 does for you since he's got 2 pieces that can simply capture without immediate recapture. You can bring you rrook to e1 and pin whichever piece captures but he can still just 0-0 castle. And he's still threatening your strong knight.

If you play 10. Nd5...gxf5 then what?

Of course - I mean obviously 3 of the moves I mentioned are inferior for the reasons you gave. I guess my point was that it seemed like I should be pushing my advantage instead of letting him catch up.

It doesn't make sense to take all these rules like "don't bring your Queen out early" or "don't move the same piece twice in the opening" too seriously. They're just general guidelines. If you look at the games of strong players you'll see lots of games where they move their queen multiple times in the first ten moves when the position demands it.

Yeah I'm just not sure you were ready to really wreck him. That's one thing I struggle with is launching an all-out attack on his king prematurely and it often ends up screwing me. It can be tough to identify when you are really ready. Your play here seemed good, and well-paced. Just look for material gains and slowly wear your opponent down, in general. You will play games against scrubs, or just players your equal who play an awful game, and you'll run hot and destroy them. After more games it will be easier to know the difference between thinking you are crushing and actually crushing.

You had to, because most of your advantage was of a tactical nature.



In this position, if Black's bishop were at c5, he'd be able to untangle himself with Qe7 and 0-0-0 after 10. Nh6, and with Ke8-f8-g8 and Ne8 after 10. Ng7. You wouldn't be able to win material by force.

I wouldn't classify your correct course of action as an "assault" (a word connotative of attacks on the king or on a weak pawn, file, rank, square, or part of the board). It's more or less a "tactical shot."

longest (and ****tiest) game I've had by far:

http://www.chessvideos.tv/chess-game...r.php?id=90161

I found a way to get back in to it after leaving Bxa8 open somehow, manage to get a pretty decent advantage with bank rank mate potential, miscalculate how easy it'd be, leave his rook alive, and completely fall apart with a terrible bishop blunder.

Didn't even wanna post this game lol.

It probably took 10 minutes to play 14... d5 15. f4 exf4 - I thought it was a really interesting spot and the tactic worked, but I dunno.

It's not really that bad a game. Ok, not taking the rook on move 24 is a pretty horrible blunder, but before that you played very well. Finding the idea of Bxd3 Rxg6 Rxe4 is impressive for a beginner.

Definitely post games like this. This isn't that bad for a beginner. You do some nice things. Move 10 is a blunder. Pulling your queen out doesn't seem to do anything and of course you leave your rook to be captured.

Why 6. Nd4? As opposed to something like d6 which lets you develop your LSB and open a couple diagonals for your Queen if you want them.

16. Nxc2+ is cheeky. Discovered checks are very powerful, especially if you can win an exchange out of it. That is considered a monster material gain against an opponent of equal skill. So good on you to recognize it.

I think you are really good for how much you have played.

But yeah, post games like this. Anytime you make large blunders it's good to post because where you made the big mistake might be 1-3 moves prior to the blunder, and thus are difficult for a beginner to recognize. The good players here can tell you where you actually erred. Though it sounds like you pretty much know what you did wrong.

What was the idea behind 7...b5?

Should've played 7...Qe7 instead. I noticed f6 looking pretty dicey and I thought it'd be fun to put some pressure on, fully aware I could lose a pawn. Probably a bad idea.

As for why not playing 6...d6, I was sick of copying him and felt Nd4 was an amazing spot for that knight and kept the game lively. I guess the repetition stops move 7 by the book anyways, which I have no idea how I knew before playing.

Again, all this feedback is amazing guys.

I will say that 6...Nd4 is probably not a bad move, but it's only "ok" if you understand how to handle 7. Nxe4, which wins a pawn (or at least appears to, in this opening such a gambit doesn't strike me as crazy).

Did you work out a sequence of moves following 7...b5? What was it that you thought would happen, and how did you evaluate the resulting position?

Don't worry about the repetition. I know as black it feels like you are a step behind and if you are just copying then you aren't making any headway but don't worry about forcing something different. The game will get complicated and more varied soon enough.

I have no idea if Nd4 is "bad" or not. It sounds like gansta says it's not too bad. But consider finishing minor development before making moves like this, unless you know what you're doing / have a long-term plan. Compare his queen and queenside bishop's mobility after 6 moves to that of yours. (Though if he wants to keep his LSB on c4 then his Queen has to stay on d1 or d2 to defend against Nxc2)

And remember, your knight can control central squares without taking up residence on them.

Do you play on chess.com at all?

I anticipated him taking with 8. Bxb5, then I wanted to play 8...d5, exchanging pawns and putting my bishop on g4 to force him to do something, while getting a pretty good centre down a pawn. All that probably leads to Nxb5 anyways, but I feel more comfortable right now being the aggressor and like the learning associated with it.

Him moving his bishop back took me aback, cause it seems like a bad move. I couldn't play 8...d5 anymore, but should've probably played 8...d6 instead of moving my b pawn.

f7 was completely secure. Lower-rated players like to come at it in positions like this, but the sequence 7...d6 8. Nxf7 Rxf7 9. Bxf7+ Kxf7 gift-wraps you a comfortable advantage: the bishop pair, a lead in development, and essentially two pieces for a rook (the f-pawn isn't that valuable in this position).

Your king is feeling a slight gust on his cross, sure, but after trading away two-thirds of his active pieces--including the only one that can exploit the opened-up a2-g8 diagonal--White isn't exactly in a position to take advantage of that. It doesn't hurt that White needs to waste a tempo on Kg1-h1 before playing f2-f4.

Even if White forgoes that sequence and finds a way to threaten to get serious heat on f7 (a pipe dream at this point), you always have h7-h6 in your back pocket.

This is interesting. I had thought that giving up a pawn like this would probably be rather bad, as I don't see enough in the center to be worth it. So I put it in my engine, and though at low ply, it seems to think that 7...d6 would give you a very small advantage, while 7...b5 gives you a very small disadvantage. Which means that it wasn't the best move, but it doesn't really change the overall evaluation of the position (ie still a very even game that anyone could win).

A little update: been hammering away on tactical puzzles and getting better and better at them. I look at chess completely different than I did at the beginning, and I still barely know anything.

Looked a little bit into MCO just for entertainment. Obviously openings are still a ways away, but it's nice to have some sort of method to check whether certain lines I'm thinking of are reasonable or terrible. My games pretty much start 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 but hey it's all about learning.

I played a game last Sat - http://www.chessvideos.tv/chess-game...r.php?id=90270

I have no experience with this line at all. I was confident in just exchanging pieces and finding a spot. I feel there is a good move somewhere in 9. that I missed, as I feel I have a decent advantage in this position.

I see the pin with the queen, but didn't see that they can get a rook and bishop for their queen the way I played it. Luckily they missed it.

So blah blah blah I make a couple bad plays, manage to gain a piece with an ok tactic, decide to kill off my bishop with 15. Qf3? like a tard, and eventually get into this situation:



I am completely lost as I have no idea what to do here. So long story short he demos me and I resign. I become angry and consume some rye.

It's evident that I'm quite far behind in endgame knowledge, as this is the first game that's really gotten there. Time to play some more and bone up on it.

Back the diagram up a move:



Why do you trade rooks here? By doing so, you give him the rook on the open file. It's too generous of you.

Speaking of trades, why 6. Bb5+ Bd7 7. Bxd7? He's more cramped (see your pawn on e4, his on d6). If you eliminate pieces, it makes him less cramped, and so his disadvantage lessens. Instead, you should develop your bishop to be aggressive (Bc4), or help strengthen your center (Bd3), or just hang around out of the way of castling until you can figure out where you need it (Be2).

9. Be3 is better than 9. Nxc6. Keeping the tension for another move or two might save a tempo in your queen's development. 9. Nf5, avoiding the exchange (Black, being more cramped, benefits from exchanges) and moving your knight to a fairly active square is also possible.

for being aware that your e4 pawn was poisoned on move 10.

You could have saved the imprisoned bishop by doubling rooks on the e-file ASAP--not that extricating it wouldn't have been a huge challenge.

18...Bxf6 is the overlooked blunder. Taking the f6 pawn gives Black a queenside pawn majority and real winning chances in the endgame. Your 3-on-2 advantage on the kingside isn't worth anything because of the doubled f-pawns. The other capture was mandatory.

edit: I posted this without reviewing your game. I see this entry by black to Re2 is exactly what killed you.

I want to post my thoughts on that position, but it's as much for me to learn as anything else so please don't think this is "the solution" for that position, because it's far from it. My instinct tells me that black has an advantage in this position (if it's not drawn), as it's so much easier for me to find productive plans for black.

The move that immediately jumps out at me is Kf1 as I want to prevent Re2. If he can get his rook to the 7th rank (rank 2), I think it's curtains for you here as you will never be able to advance.

But, then Re5 for black looks strong followed by Rf5, Rh5 or Rb5. White needs to activate his rook so Rd4 seems reasonable. The idea behind placing the rook on the 4th rank is one of defense and offense. If black tries to attack h or b then white can push the pawn and the rook defends it. Also, white can counterattack against black's pawns.

I'm seeing this:
1. Kf1 Re5
2. Rd4 Rf5
3. Ke2 (you need to get your king mobile)

So, the basics of the position as I see it is to:
1) prevent black from penetrating
2) activate your rook
3) activate your king
4) hope black makes significant mistakes

This. +10