4. Would prefer either d2-d3 or d2-d4. I agree with BJJ on 4. Bd3.

8. White should be fine after Qxf3 Bg4, but it's a calculationally dense line (15/10 might not provide enough time to sift through the key variations), so I don't really mind this.

16. Would just go pawn-munching here. After Qxc7, you're up four pawns and can leverage your space/initiative advantage to "encourage" a simplification into a winning endgame (the queen can also fly back to g3 in the event of ...Qh3). As played, your kingside is too weak to castle into; Black's queen and bishops can pose serious problems after moves like Bh3 and Bg5-f4.

18. ...Bxd2 is a disastrous trade for Black. It is the foul-up.

29. Qb8 turns down a free rook, but Black seems eager to give it to you anyway.

I definitely considered d3 or d4. I'm not good enough to know how to play this line while not being concerned about the following:

In other words...these are my concerns, wrong they may be:

1) d3 protects my pawn from capture by his Knight (and his long-term goal of forking my Queen and Rook or whatever...) but it also clogs the diagonal for my LSB. Isn't this a bad thing?

2) d4 gives him a pawn if he wants it. Though it does block his DSB from being able to assist his Knight if he gets it to F2.

Basically, where I'm at skillwise I don't know how to make these moves without being worried about 'monsters under the bed'. It's hard to hear don't worry but I still worry and probably end up playing -EV moves that I'm not smart enough to be worried by. lol.

Rei, "29. Qb8 turns down a free rook".

I don't follow. Elaborate?

It doesn't. Derpderpderp.

U scared me there. I'm bad enough as is lol. Was staring at it for a few minutes.

I saw the bishop threat immediately the first time. Not sure why I even commented on that move. It's kind of late.

1) d3 does force you to contend with a space disadvantage, but Bd3's poisons are a lot more toxic. Also, Bd3 hinders your DSB's development, so at least in terms of bishop mobility, d3 is at least as good as Bd3.

2) d4 is the most common continuation, and according to ChessTempo's database, 4 ... Nxe4 5. d5 Ne7 6. Nxe5, where White wins back the pawn, is the most common line.

Lost to a dude about 200 points higher than me in 80 moves. We were probably in a forced draw position or he might accept a draw if I offer (each side down to K, R, p) but I get bored and try to win making a stupid move and it doesn't work. lol. Oh well.

I then get lucky against a dude who is 136 points my superior. He's crushing me and I'm cursing my dumb opening (Think I'm starting to see the light of a thousand years of trial and error data). I consider resigning a couple times after 10-20 moves or so as he's pushing my poo in way too hard, then I tell myself to keep fighting and maybe he'll slip up. He does, by taking my Queen's pawn and forking my Rook and King. Unfortunately for him I hadn't moved my Queen yet and captured his Queen. So I ended up logging a new "best win". Yay. Both games were super sloppy though on my part and I would have been very lucky to escape with a draw and win. I wanted to get the taste out of my mouth and went to play a scrub blitz game and almost lost. Then foe got greedy and went after rooks and stuff that didn't matter, without recognizing I was 2 moves from Mate.

When you find yourself consistently beating players rated higher than you, and then feeling like you played sloppily or badly, you know you're getting better

This was a pretty clean game for me. I'm surprised he was rated nearly 900 over a large sample. He or she may have been drinking or something since they appeared well weaker to me than a typical 900. Only a few mistakes that I can see myself, and I like how I finished him off. I had so many pieces it was actually strange trying to make sure I don't pin or skewer myself, as well as trying to figure out the most efficient way to mate him. But I like how I closed.

2. c6. I seem to be having decent success with this little pawn response to his open side Knight development, so I play it again.

He plays 7.Qe2 here which I think is a mistake. He's more developed than me, and he can move his LSB there to protect his Knight, or bring that Knight back to block the check. I think him bringing his Queen out here is the worst option. I continue to develop and I'm surprised when he trades Queens with me, especially since upon capture I am threatening his Knight, which he ends up bringing back anyway (to the same square he could have blocked check with in the first place).

9. d4. I think this is correct here to fork his Knights. He wastes time by bringing his LSB out to threaten my Knight which is protected. It seems I can take either Knight, since neither of them is threatening any of my pieces, and neither can get to a position to backup the c6 square any time soon.

10. dxe3. I decide to take the Knight nearest to his King to try to weaken this pawn structure in front of his King. I think he captures with the wrong pawn here because I think he should take with the other pawn so he can develop his DSB, and keep the pawn wall intact in front of what looks like will become 0-0 castling for him. He must want to get his King's rook out but I think it's way too early for that.

14. Nxe4. He blunders here and I capture his Knight for nothing.

18. Bxa2. Upon reflection I think this is a mistake. In fact, shortly after I played this I felt like it was a mistake. I realize if he plays 20.c3 I'm in a really bad spot. I shouldn't have been this aggressive with my Bishop, since his pawn structure can cause serious problems for my minor pieces. My Knight is pinned now to support that bishop and if he plays this pawn move I have to back my Bishop out of there and I lose my Knight. I'd also then have my other Bishop threatened so I'd recapture and give him a chance to move his LSB, which I wasted tempo threatening, to a square that allows a trade at worst for him. Luckily, he plays the wrong pawn and donates. I kinda wish he played c3 just to get me better practice.

21. Bxc4. He blunders again and I get a Bishop for nothing. And back it out of a threatened square. Bad play by him.

22. f6 is another "big" mistake by me. I noticed several moves earlier that if he moves his Rook he discovers an attack on my Knight. At least I pulled the pawn up because I thought he was attacking with his Rook. Clear play here is Nxe4. Free pawn, center square, evade capture.

24. Nxc2 I only play after I recognize that I can protect my LSB when he plays to pin us which I assume he will (and he does). So this was not an uncalculated play.

From here I think I clean up pretty nicely. I trade Rooks on purpose, then have some fun with the Knight, then bring both Bishops in for the attack and finish him with the Rook.

He played a poor game imo but this was one of my better ones for sure. For where I'm at, I only consider moves 18 & 22 as mistakes that I feel I should recognize during play. But overall these are pretty minor self-nits and I'm very happy with my performance here. Up to 928.

Opening scheme is a bit...odd--you're basically down a pawn for nothing by move 5. 3.d4 is plausible and after a normal move six (Qe2, d4 or Bb5+) White is much better.

6...Qe7+ (instead of checking on e6) wins a piece by force.

White misses 8.Nxd5

9...d4 is good but White can avoid immediate material loss with 10.Nb5.

Why not 13...Bxa2 or Nxc2?

...last few moves look like the most precise way to finish things (better than grabbing the rook on h6, but did you notice that it was available with 32...Ng4+?)

(Does it make sense to have a dedicated thread/log for your games? This thread is low enough volume that maybe it doesn't really matter, otherwise I would think that it'd be easier to read through.)

Yeah I don't like that I gave him a pawn for free early.

6 Qe7+ wins a piece by force. I can't figure out what this means. Can you please elaborate for me?

White missed 8.Nxd5 as well as myself. Oops.

9 good call on 10.Nb5. Again, I didn't see that. Would have been a rare find for white at this level. Was moving my pawn forward still the right play or should I just develop?

13 Bxa2 I don't think I had noticed yet. I play it later but I don't think I recognized the free pawn yet. Though I'm in a much better position to play it now than I am later. Nxc2 I saw but I decided to keep developing since I've only got a couple minor pieces out. I put him in a position to trade me since I'm up material. Ends out working for me as he fails to protect his Knight.

No I did not notice the fork on move 32. Had I noticed it I definitely would have captured his Rook. It didn't end up mattering but still, yeah, I would have captured just to be sure.

I can certainly start a log for my games if it's too cluttered in here. The forum seems pretty low-volume and I like the visibility posting in here gets me and it's admittedly very self-serving, but yeah I can understand how I'm probably imposing and cramping the style. I think I'll get less feedback with a dedicated blog but it's mod's call. I'll start one if enough people want it or BJJ wants it.

I will say in 43 matches, I've gone from a 672 to a 928 and I feel it's mostly from the feedback I've gotten from y'all. Forcing myself to review my games and type out my thoughts also helps a ton because I end up seeing things I missed during the action.

2... c6 might be playable but looks a little weird to me because it complicates the defense of your e pawn. 6 Ng4 is weak but after 6 Bb5+ I think black is already starting to have problems (after Bb5+ the knight can be maintained on e5 either through d4 or by castling, because if the queen takes the knight after white castles, Re1 pins the queen).

7 Qe2 looks ok to me. Regarding development, the knight isn't doing anything on g4 other than serving as a target. The knight retreat wasn't necessary but if he was going to retreat, just going back to f3 would have been better.

9 Ne3 walks into the d4 fork, instead 9 f3 protects the knight and clears f2 for a safe retreat in case a pawn chases the knight.

13 Rb1 tries to avoid the knight fork with check on c2 (though it doesn't protect the c2 pawn, 13 Ba4 does). This fails completely after 13... Bxa2 and white loses the rook anyway (14 Ra1 Nxc2+). 13... Nxc2+ was also available.

20... Bb6 is strange, the pawn that attacked you is just hanging so you can take it but notice if you take his bishop he can't take yours anyway. 20... axb5 21 dxc5 opens up the d file for a back rank mate (which white can no longer successfully block without that bishop).

Couldn't I play Kd8 if he plays Bb5+ and negate his potential rook pin? He can still bring the pawn up though like you said.


Nice analysis. Wish I had recognized this ability to take his Rook through forcing moves. I was surprised when he moved his rook to evade the fork. I thought he would have played Kd1. Though your idea of using the bishop to protect is better since it maintains his diagonal position, gets him farther from my dangerous pawns, and keeps his King on a dark square since I can check him easily with my LSB.

Wow. Nice catch. My first thought was to take his pawn with my DSB (I think I had forgotten that his bishop was under attack by my a pawn - lol). If I took his pawn with Bishop then he plays c3 and forks 2 minor pieces. And there I was patting myself for not being foolish by capturing his hanging pawn! lol. I hadn't even looked at that easy CM I would have had had he taken my Bishop. Would have felt good. Didn't think I was ready to start searching for CM yet but lesson learned.

The knight on g4 -- 6...Qe6+ Qe2 and Black can't win it. 6...Qe7+ and the knight is lost. See whether you can work it out (or give some variations; what did you try?).

Based on an earlier game, I figured as much. But the moves you played here were actually better :-)

Honestly, I think the same people will read, but maybe not. Agree that reviewing your games and figuring out what you miss is an excellent way to spend your time.

Regarding the idea of a separate log thread, I think it's up to you. It's definitely not strictly necessary; I'm not concerned with "clutter" in our BBV and low content threads (which I think are among the highest content such threads on 2+2 - a fact I take pride in). And I think Sholar is right that it probably won't change your readership much. The people who will read your posts and offer advice will probably do so regardless of where it's posted.

One possible upside of a separate thread is that by grouping everything together it will be easier (for both you, and your audience) to keep track of what advice has been previously given. This will allow for perhaps slightly more specific recommendations, as it will be easier to distinguish between your one-off mistakes, and the things you do consistently that warrant more extensive discussion. It's a pretty minor benefit, and it's up to you whether you want to start your own thread or not. If you're happy just posing in LC and BBV, that's also perfectly fine, imo.

I think it's a good idea to have my own log here since I've ended up posting way more content than I thought I would.

Herein, I will post matches I play (not all of them), with my own commentary about both sides. This helps me discover mistakes and talking "out loud" will help other posters know where I'm at conceptually and can better advise me.

For posterity: I began playing in the last week of November, 2013, and started playing 10 minute Blitz games where I played about 150 of them and went from 660 up to 820 or so. Ditched Blitz and switched to 15/10 games, which I seem to concentrate better at, and have gone from a low of 672 on chess.com to 928 in 48 games or so. Hopefully quad digits is around the corner. Not sure how high I can go, or how much effort I will put into it, but it would be nice to be able to pretty much beat any casual chess player in OTB games I might play. (Family, friends, etc.) Will try to post a game later tonight. If mod wants, he can certainly move my BBV posts here, but that's a lot of work and I do not care either way. Happy posting!

A+ title

Just had someone play that same opening (Ruy Lopez exchange variation) with 5 Nxe5, and from the analysis in this thread I remembered to play Qd4 which it's questionable I would have found otherwise.

http://www.chess.com/livechess/game?id=692507831

My opponent then spazzed out with 6 Nxf7 and without thinking it through properly I went ahead and took the knight. Should have played Qxe4+ first! Still got the win but I could have made things easier for myself.

It's funny you posted this. I was reviewing this game of yours about a half-hour ago. This isn't standard but once in a while I'll look at a game of one of my chess.com friends. I just so happened to pick this one of yours. You crushed that dude. You were up a minor piece and you forked him for a trade at worst and he resigned.

Well 5 Nxe5 is bad, and 6 Nxf7 is idiotic, so I was in control the whole way. Just not happy with missing Qxe4+ which in addition to winning a pawn takes away his castling rights (either immediately when he moves the king or after he blocks with the queen when I'm very happy to trade the queens off and be up material after taking the knight).

After 5 Nxe5? Qd4 it should go 6 Ng4 Qxe4+ 7 Ne3 and black is probably a little better but there's still a game to be played. After the silly knight sac I just had to not screw up too badly and it's an easy win, though even easier if I don't miss Qxe4+ before taking the knight.

6. Nxf7... he was clearly just trying to transpose into the fried liver attack.

I saw his 6.Nxf7 and thought "wow, when I'm at 1400 I'll understand it I guess.."

The idea is that after ...Kxf7, White has two pawns for the piece and has stranded Black's king out in the open. It's not much worse for White than 6. Nf3 (Houdini rates it as about three-quarters of a pawn worse), but Black still has a comfortable advantage. It's sort of like a weird version of the Fried Liver Attack.

But ...Qxe4+ obliterates it. It's a blunder. In this sense, there isn't much to understand.

Hey, just found this, I'll be following.

I used to play at pretty decent level, but haven't played for real in a long time except for the occasional game here and there, I just don't have enough time

OK I'm on cloud 9. This is a new "highest rated" win for me, and I think probably the best game I've played so far. I feel like getting CM here shows real growth in my game.

This game featured hanging a minor piece by design (he didn't go for it), a clear offensive attack on one side of the board that becomes thwarted, followed by a restructured attack on the other side (the back door) that ends beautifully with a CM, even though I'm down material. I play an incredible (for me) calculated Bishop sacrifice on 17.Bxd6 that he goes for. He's dead within 11 moves. My major error was letting him play 15.Qxg5+ I thought this was a real turning point in the game but I simply re-assessed and moved my attack to the other side of the board. I also think I showed incredible maturity and patience by largely ignoring his pawn advances and calculating my finish. My timer was <2:00 and he had like 10 left. Rating up to 939.

I don't have time right now to post my thoughts on all the moves because I got to take my dog to the vet but maybe I will later. It should be pretty obvious what my first and second gameplans were, though, for you guys.

Somewhere I dream there is a forum where Euler is posting "how did I lose this!?" lol