FFFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU!

Well, that was fun. My solution assumes no Rook on e8.

I played an interesting blitz game as white http://www.chessvideos.tv/chess-game...r.php?id=59635

I'm an idiot, I forgot to post the solution to the puzzle. It's in this spoiler.

I should note that the position isn't a typical "white to play and win" with one crushing final blow, I was more looking for ideas to and the best moves to keep white's huge advantage.

Made my return to tourney chess to defend my 2100 rating against a 1600. After I won a piece in the opening, my opponent planned to play Ne4 (attacking my Q on d2). I countered with Ne2-g3, and when he played his Ne4, calmly picked up my other N on f3 and captured it. He generously pointed out that this was not how horseys moved and I resigned. Successful comeback??

You're only down a queen for two pieces and 500 rating points. That's like about a pawn. Play on.

Unless the knight you now have to move was the only thing protecting the queen. Then you're screwed.

Exactly my reaction. I think the expert player is still the favorite to win with two knights for the queen if the rest of the board is still "normal". Black already dropped one piece in that game...

Pretty sure in similar circumstances I once managed to win down a queen for a piece. Just started a slow kingside attack...

I wouldnt resign a game Im down a queen for two pieces myself.

1.Qe1? (Qf1!) Rda8 2. c7 Ra1 3. c8=Q+ Kg7 -+



2 rooks are better than 2 queens



http://www.chessvideos.tv/chess-game...r.php?id=59872

Major +1 to delay being used in all events. Just makes things so much clearer when low on time for both the player and the TD.

Yeah, I would not play in sudden death events without time delay either. Just for the off chance that a situation like that occurs - it's really aggravating.

I would have asked for a time delay clock to be added in that situation. I've seen (not exact position but an endgame with very few pieces) times when a TD has allowed the time delay clock added and times when a TD hasn't added the time delay clock.

Allen, at least you know you played your higher rated opponent to a "draw" by reaching (and knowing the technique for) Philidor's position. So try to take some satisfaction in that. Playing well and gaining experience is worth much more than losing a small amount of rating points in the long term.

I'm glad to hear that you're still playing tournaments too.

I was bored after playing a Words With Friends move on my IFun, so I decided to try out Chess With Friends.

Brag: Team 45 45 is back!

Beat: I completely and utterly embarrassed myself and my team had to settle for a 2:2 draw after being up 2:1. http://team4545league.org/pgnplayer/...r.php?id=52219

Variance: It wasn't because of lack of effort. I chewed up 101 minutes of clock in a 45 45 game.

I played the opening with newbtastic nooooobness spewing pieces around instead of developing. I actually did see the bishop trap coming and intentionally sacced it. I then completely and utterly failed to see 23. ... f5, which crushes pretty hard.

I had planned on playing 40. ... Rxe3 41. Qxe3 Qxb2+ with probably equal chances, but instead I got a better (?) idea and weakened my king instead on an ill-advised pawn push.

From there on out I was in one of those overly optimistic states where I'm convinced I'm playing for the win and don't want to slip up and let him draw, only to suddenly realize at the end that I'm lost and probably should have been trying to hang on for a draw instead.

I play the crappy Windows built in chess thing sometimes when my internet connection craps out. I had a 38 game winning streak, and then I had queen+king vs. king, and the dumb thing incorrectly announced that it was a draw by repetition while I was in the process of marching my king over from the other side of the board.

Laaaaaaaaaaaame.

You sure? Seems like an odd mistake from a computer, though not impossible for sure.

Kinda thought of it afterwards; resigned mostly in just utter shock. Here was the position where I played Nf3xe4:



Anyways, the story had a relatively happy ending as I used the swiss gambit successfully, and won the next 3 rounds over players rated 1874, 2037, and 1901. This brought me to board 2 in the last round, where I was wiped off the face of the earth by an IM. However, all other results went well for me and I took a share of the <2200 prize for a cool $75.

Sounds like you're capable of playing a lot better than you normally do.

I don't think a good amount of the mistakes you make are chess related.

Try focus on "back to basics" type approach, aim to keep things simple, and avoid fancy play syndrome / fancy thinking syndrome. I'd be surprised if your results didn't have a nice jump if you did these things.

Could also have been the 50 move rule if he took forever to mate with the K+Q

More IM simul brag, this time I get the whole point against Martha Fierro on ICC.

http://www.chessvideos.tv/chess-game...r.php?id=60070

The vibe of "okay, I'm up a pawn, time to go into autopilot against this donk" is almost palpable, but she botches the endgame.

Maybe u can even play for a win with 45.. Bb1?

edit: rofl at my reading comprehension, I thought you drew and wrote that comment without looking at the end of the game. Congrats!

Congrats Kyle, that is awesome. The only thing better than an IM scalp is a female IM scalp, proving women belong in the kitchen and not on the chess board.

**Disclaimer** Completely joking jenium, please don't hurt me.

The best chefs are man too actually so they dont belong in the kitchen either.
And if we are going by stereotypes women should actually be better at simuls than men because they are better at doing lots of things at the same time

Nobody thinks more than 1 game at a time in simuls.

Women do.

beat: I just hanged a knight on a game. Its against a 1280 player so hopefully I will manage to come back .