So, I've never been rated and have only ever played online. I think I was "ok" about 13 years ago (16-1700 on yahoo), but have just started studying again a week or two ago. I am studying tactics right now, and playing at chess.com. I have a number of books from my previous attempt to get decent at chess. After browsing this forum I like the idea of posting some games and just starting a general thread like some of the others here have done. I have had fun reading them. Here is a recent game I played as white where I developed a plan to trap his queen, made some mistakes, but he made worse mistakes and I came out on top and then blundered due to time trouble with my knight. I appreciate any feedback that you might have.

Houdini shows me there were a number of mistakes on both sides of the board, but I tried to keep the game interesting and push my tactical limits. This is why I forgo the obvious bishop exchange which would have solidified my advantage.

Game 1

This forum doesn't seem to get too much traffic, which is why I thought it might be ok to post. If these threads arent' welcome that's cool.

Just to clarify, I might have been "ok" once upon a time, but I realize that I am terrible now. This game was 15/10 and I find that even that is a bit too fast for me to spend time calculating and analyzing positions.

As for books this is what I have:
Winning Chess Tactics - Seirawen
Winning Chess Openings - Seirawen
Winning Chess Strategy - Seirawen
Winning Chess Endings - Seirawen
Winning Chess Brilliancies - Seirawen
The Game of Chess - Tarrasch (unfortunately this is in descriptive notation)
1001 Brilliant Ways to Checkmate - Reinfeld
How to Reassess Your Chess - Silman
Life and Games of Mikhail Tal - Tal
Improve Your Chess Now - Tisdall

My current study plan is:
Tactics - Seirawen (almost finished)
Game of Chess (middle game section)
1001 Checkmates
chesstempo.com (continuously throughout the above books)
Strategy - Seirawen

At this point I will reevaluate and try to decide what I need to work on. I remember that the endgame section of Tarrasch was good, and the beginning section of Silman was excellent, but I am not sure I ever studied Silman fully or properly. Actually a few of those books listed above haven't been used much.

You're White or Black? The first 13ish moves were better than what I expected from the foreshadowing but then things got pretty ugly The back rank tactics by White later on were wp again

Sorry, yes, I am white. Knowing how ugly it is I guess I'm not sure why I posted it. I know I struggled with parts of the game (prior to giving up the knight, which was made very fast due to only having 1 minute left).

Yeah I suspected you were White. Some comments:
6.Ba4: you could consider that the B has done its job now that you have a solid centre and play 6.Bc4 instead
11.Rd1: not too bad, he's behind in development so you want to get punches in now. Other possible ideas include a4, Qg3 and dxe5. 11.dxe5 dxe5 12.a4 Rb8 13.axb5 axb5 14.Qg3 would be ideal because 14.-Nge7 15.Rd1 looks really unpleasant. Too bad Black can play 11.-Nxe5. Not sure what's the best way to put pressure on Black here.
12.Bxc6: very committal and shouldn't be played without a good reason. I like 12.a4 here
13.d5: first I felt critical about this but on a second look I think it might be good. You can still attack his Q-side while he's lagging in development. Say, 13.-Qb7 14.a4 Be7 15.axb5 axb5 16.Rxa8 Qxa8 17.Na3 and perhaps W still has something?
13.-Qc4 14.Be3: Black is not being too shy about his intentions to take the d-pawn but you still don't protect it - 14.Nbd2 with tempo obviously
15.Nd2 Qa4 16.Nb1: don't get this one at all
16.-Nxe4: oh no not that way, Qxe4 instead
19.Be3: 19.Bxe7 instead is much more natural: trade pieces when up material and deny castling. I guess this is the bishop exchange you mentioned. It's a minor offense compared to 14.Be3 and 16.Nb1 though
20.b4 Qa4: the Q is annoyingly placed on a4, maybe 20.a4 for example to stop that.
21.Bc1: Undeveloping again? You gotta stop doing that. Why not Nd2? You could also play something like 21.Rc1 and 22.Qd1 now just to get rid of the Q.
24.Bb2: maybe 24.Be3 -> Bd4 here, this looks passive
26.Nxe4: this worked out well, but I suspect 26.Nb3 is objectively better. At least now the Qa4 looks out of play for a moment
35.Qxc8: whew 36.Qe6+: I guess you could play Re8 here right away

Like I said, not that awful except for moves 14-16. Better than I expected to see after "1600-1700 yahoo 13 years ago"

Oh and: Don't do this during the game. Just focus on playing good moves. I can understand avoiding trades in order to not end up in a dead drawn position but that's not the case here.

Thanks for taking a look!

After 6. Bc4 b5 does my bishop not end up at b4 anyways? Is Bc4 objectively better than Ba4 because Bc4 puts direct pressure on the center squares?

12. a4 looks really good. I haven't played a Ruy Lopez in a LONG time, and forgot that a4 is often part of that opening. Now that you point it out I really hate my bishop trade here as it was strongly positioned.

13. I simply missed this as I was concentrating on his queen and coming up with a plan to trap it and eventually take it. Hopefully I stop making these blunders.

This "plan" explains all of these "undeveloping moves". I thought I could get some type of attack on that queen, but I was wrong. Houdini agrees with you that all of these moves were terrible.


19.Bxe7 - yes this is the bishop exchange I mentioned. I think this move is great, but again I was repositioning to keep black's queen caged. I need to be more fluid.

35.Qxc8 I was happy I saw this move.

36. Re8 - I wish I would have saw this. I was moving fast here.

Yes, I am going to stop doing this.

Thanks again!

Nunn says DAUT - don't analyze unnecessary tactics. For example if there's a safe and good line, don't go and spend 10 mins looking at a sacrifice.

Really? But, what if that analysis results in a forced mate in 6 or large material gain? This quote doesn't seem right to me.

So, I have been playing way too much blitz chess. I like that it's over in 10 minutes, but it doesn't really help me improve at all as they are complete blunder fests at the level I am playing.

Right now I am spending the majority of my "study" time on chesstempo and have a standard rating of 1650. Problems that are 1600+ are still very difficult and can take me 10 minutes to solve. I've purchased "Chess Tactics for Students" after reading Heisman's recommendation, but it hasn't arrived yet.

I've decided that I am going to read through Seirawen's Strategy book next as I have noticed that my games don't seem to have plans. If I am not in a tactical slugfest I am lost as to the best move. Also, 10 years ago my endgame was quite good relative to my opposition, but now it seems like my endgame is terrible. I will study that section of Tarrasch and possibly the beginning of How to Reassess Your Chess.

It seems like it's difficult to know what to study next to advance. I know I shouldn't study openings, but have recently started trying the slav against d4 and feel lost in the first 8 moves as the positions don't feel natural to me. I have previously always played Nf6 based on Seirawen's "opening solutions" from his openings book, which is meant for beginners.

I think the best way to improve is to play a lot and look over your own games afterwards. Of course studying matters a lot too. I think focusing on strategies/middle game is a good way to approach things, since as you play better opponents, you need more than just tactics to win.

So, in a current ongoing correspondence game I have reached this position (I am black and it is my move) and I am lost. I am not looking for advice as to what the best move would be, but I am curious about what my plan should be or what things I should be considering in this position. I feel completely lost.

The move sequence was:
1.f4 d5
2.Nf3 g6
3.d4 Bg7
4.e3 Nf6
5.c4 e6
6.Bd3 O-O
7.O-O Nc6
8.a3

I used chesstempo to help with opening book (4 moves) as I have read that is acceptable practice in correspondence chess and I was completely thrown off by 1. f4. Is this acceptable or is it cheating?

My thoughts:

- I like the hole at e4 and will look to get one of my pieces into it, but I feel like it's too early for Ne4 as after Bxe4 dxe4 Ne5 Nxe5 I have lost this advanced output.
- Opening book suggested e3 so dxc4 does not seem congruent with that play
- Candidate moves for me are (in order): Re1 (this is 99.9% likely to be my next move), Na5, a6, h6, Bd7... but as I said at the beginning, none of these moves have a plan behind them.

Is there any general insight that could be offered that would help me without actually cheating?

I'm not much of a correspondence player, but from what I understand, you can basically use any resources available (opening books, magazines, databases, endgame books, etc) other than computer engines and other people. Pretty much any research you're able to do is allowed.


Since the game is ongoing, I don't think we're allowed to help yet. But I'd be happy to look over the game and offer advice once it's finished.

I think it would be unethical to offer specific advice about the position. But in general you're correct that you should not play a move without any idea behind it.

Some questions to think about:

You've identified White's weakness on e4. Is there any way you can bring additional pieces to bear against this weakness? Are there any other potential weaknesses in White's position that you could exploit?

What are the potential pawn breaks for each side? What are the consequences arising from them?

Which of your pieces are not taking part in the game? How can you bring them into play in an effective way?

What does your opponent want to do? How dangerous are his ideas? Do you have any way to hold up his plans while improving your own game?

Fair enough. I wasn't positive but suspected as much. I will make my move and play on hoping not to blunder too much. I like Re8 as I think the e-file will be important and process of elimination doesn't leave me with many moves I like.

Thanks for the advice regarding correspondence games.

In hindsight I agree with this and hope no one provides specific advice. The questions you asked me are the type I was looking for when I posted though. To get me thinking about the right things, as I am not sure I do that enough during the games I play.

I've been thinking about b6 - Bb7 - dxc4 opening up the h1-a8 diagonal with my LSB pointing at e4 and the exposed kingside.

The only other weakness I recognize (and I'm still working on positional concepts a lot right now) is that his f4 pawn break exposes his king a bit.


I don't know. He looks poised to expand on the queenside. I am not sure what I should do. I keep looking at that king but don't see any breaks for myself yet. It's a weakness I have.

My c8 bishop and a8 rook haven't done anything and neither has my queen. I don't see a plan for getting the queen involved yet, nor the a8 rook, but my above quoted idea for the c8 bishop getting to b7 is one idea I had to activate that piece.

I don't know. I think he wants to get into my e5 weakness and possibly open up the f or e files with an attack on my king or expand on the queenside.

These questions are still cheating, imo. It's best just to never present ongoing games.

Sure thing. I will try to take note of interesting spots and present them later when I post a game for advice. I won't look at this thread again until the game is finish, and we are many moves past the position I posted (and I think I am losing).

So the game is over. I won because my opponent blundered, but I feel like I was losing for pretty much every move after the position I posted in this thread. Here is a link to the game and my thought process.

Bird Opening Game

So, at move 8 I decided to play Re8 as per my previous discussion in this thread. I thought he would respond Nc3 (I would have), and again I didn't know what to do but continued with my plan of putting increasing pressure on e4 so I played b6 intending to fianchetto, but really I just lost tempo.

10. cxd5 surprised me, but I feel like I have to recapture. I thought he would play Nxc5 in response though.

11. Ne5 surprised me again and I decided to exchange because his knight on e5 looked menacing and I felt a little cramped.

12. ... Ng4 - I think this hurt me a lot. I evaluated Nd7, but again I "felt" cramped and Nd7 appeared to make that worse. In retrospect I think it is much better. I did not see his bishop move here.

13. Bd7 - I spent a LONG time on this move. I evaluated Re7, Re6, Rf8 and Bd7.
Re6 I eliminated because after 14. Qxd5 Qxd5 15. Nxd5 c6 16. Bxc6 I saw that Rxc6 loses to 17. Ne7+
Re7 I eliminated because 14. Nxd5 Re6 didn't look good.
Rf8 seemed ok, but ultimately Bd7 looked "easier", but I saw that I was going to be down a pawn. This is where I was when I posted that I thought I was losing badly.

16. ... Qxd5 is a mistake according to houdini. I didn't even consider Nxe5. I also didn't think he would respond Qxg4. I thought he was going to trade queens and then take back his knight with the h pawn and I would get some chances with his two sets of doubled pawns.

17. ... f6 - I didn't know what to do so I wanted to activate my bishop. I also looked at h5 - Bf8

19. f5 - I didn't consider this response, but now I am going to try and dislodge his queen

20. Qg5 is not what I thought he would do. I thought he would retreat his queen with Qf2 or Qf3 and I was going to play Rf8 placing my rook inline with his queen. When he played Qg5 I didn't want to change any of my pieces in the center so continued with Rf8.

21. f6 - this scared the crap out of me as I didn't expect it and now he has an advanced passed pawn. I stared at this for a while, but I had been looking for potential checks in the previous positions (with my queen if I could get rid of the pawn on e3) so eventually I saw the Bh2+ winning move. I was really happy with this. From here it was a route.

I think I got pretty lucky in this game, even though houdini shows me as only a fraction of a pawn down I felt like I was much worse. I guess my active peices compensate for lack of material?

My online chess rating is now 1744, but I'm 6-0 so I think this is drastically inflated.

Re the opening: White looks to be trying to play a reversed Stonewall Dutch so usually you want to swap off your light squared Bishop for his. To this end it's probably better to play 7.... b6 followed by Ba6 rather than Nc6. This makes his manoeuvre of Bb5 x d7 not look to great and probably explains why your position is not that bad even when you lose the pawn on d5.

Neat, I never considered that. I feel like I need to understand openings better, but I still have so much work to do on tactics and strategy. Everything I read tells me both of these are much more important than openings so I will continue to make mistakes during this phase.

I'm playing four more correspondence games now. An Evan's Gambit (I'm black), an Alekhine (I'm white), a Ruy Lopez (I'm white) and the last game is only two moves in (I'm black and it's an e4 e5, nf3 nc6 start).

Small brag (if people would prefer I not post games like this I will refrain in the future), but I think this is my best played game ever.

Best Game to Date

I realized that my opponent had outs, but I feel like I put enough pressure on him that he caved. I didn't really "see" the win until very late, but it felt like I had tremendous latent potential.

I used an opening book and chesstempo as my database, and read about the idea Ba3 idea in the Winnawer variation of the French, and it was this idea that ultimately won me the game by putting all of hte pressure on the queenside with Bd6,

Key moves according to houdini, or just myself:

I was happy with 10. h4, 11. h5, 12. g4 as my idea was to restrict his knight on e7. Houdini shows it as irrelevant but I am happy because I had a plan and executed it and was critical later.

15. Bd6... I was super happy to "see" this move. Houdini only says it's a 1.2 advantage, but I felt like I was winning with this move.

20. ... Nxd6 was my opponent's huge blunder. If instead of that he plays b6 I only have a small advantage. I give myself credit for taking advantage of this blunder though.
21. ... Bc8 and my opponent protects against the wrong threat further compounding my advantage.
22 Nh4 and 23. Ng6 - I was happy with this knight walk. I really didn't see any knockouts so I simply wanted to get another piece involved.

26. f4. Houdini scores this move very high! My reasoning was simple though... My bishop on e2 is useless and my position felt super strong, but I didn't see a knockout so I wanted to activate this bishop by moving him to f3, but if I did that now then my pawn is restricted so I figure my opponent is totally hampered and that I will gain space and play f4 followed by Bf3 and he can't stop me from doing it. Also, I didn't really see how it would play out but I like my pawn on f4 to help with exchanges around e5. All of this is directly applying my new learning from "Winning Chess Strategies" by Seirawen.

27. Ne5! change of plans! Houdini says this is mate in 6. I didn't see it yet. I saw:

27. Ne5! Nxe5
28. Qc7#

27. Ne5! Kd8
28. Rxc6! bxc6
29. Qb6# (Rxc6 was super hard for me to see until I calculated past bxc6 and saw mate)

27. Ne5! Kd8
28. Rxc6! bxc6
29. Qb6#

27. Ne5! Kd8
28. Rxc6! Bd7
29. Qb6#

and finally

27. Ne5! Kd8
28. Rxc6! Rf8
29. Qb6+ Qe8... and then with the analysis board, which is ok in corresondence
30. Qc7!!! (this took me a while, but it's forced mate)

Seems nice. My one quick thought is that 25. Rxc6 wins the knight due to exposing the attack on the queen.

Wow, thanks for the compliment, but you simultaneously humbled me as I didn't even catch that in my post game analysis. Part of my thinking behind 24. Rb6 was to enable 25. Rhb1, so I wasn't even calculating anything around the knight on c6 on these two moves.

I almost always try to double rooks because this Alekhine vs Nimzowitsch example has always stuck with me.

Also, in the game it felt like there was very little black could do so I wanted to just keep bringing in more guns knowing that eventually there should be a killing blow. I guess I missed one of them, as you pointed out, but still have a strong position after the move I made.

And this is a tad better than my "Game 1".

A few comments on the opening phase - I think after 13.-0-0-0 you played well (apart from missing Rxc6, but that didn't throw the win away)
6.-c4? Awful, removing the central tension and making his counterplay very hard to achieve (after closing the q-side like this it should involve f6 soon)
7.Nf3 - Qg4 is another common Winawer theme and especially right after black's 6.-c4? as it provokes a weakness on the K-side without any downside to it.
9.-a5? also very strange, i guess he is trying to blockade everything (not a good try)
12.g4 - hasty? Maybe Ba3 first - I am not sure if you need to burn bridges regarding castling short just yet.
13.Kf1, still 13.Ba3. I think Black should have played f6 for a couple of moves already and this really is his last chance saloon. I am not even sure if you are considerably better after f6 - 13.-f6 14.Bf4 could be met by 14.-g5! if I'm seeing correctly.
14.-f6: now he is too late as he fails to break the centre

Thanks wlrs! I appreciate you taking a look and your comments about the opening. I still have very little understanding of correct opening play, but correspondence gives me a fighting chance to come out of it relatively unscathed. I have another Winawer game going where I played Qg4 and I'm not sure why I didn't in this game.