Yeah either 6.h4, or something other than 7.Nxh4.

In the first case, black will need to organize f6 and g5 to continue attacking. That's going to take a lot of preparation, as his king can hardly stay on e8 for that. This will give you a chance to open things up in the center or the queenside. And after all that, you can just ignore the g5 pawn, allowing gxh4 Nxh4 and it will now take more time to dislodge this knight with pieces. Or he can try to take the knight on f3 first with the bishop, but then the g2 bishop becomes a much better defender without a black light square bishop on the board.

In the second case, after 6.cxd5 exd5 7.Nc3, stockfish wants to play h3 forcing Bh1, but that just ends the kingside attack, and nothing bad has happened to white. But it's hard to continue the attack in any case, as black has stuff to worry about on d5 (Nf6 Ne5), c7 (Qd7 Bf4+Nb5), and b7 (Qb3).

Yugo, his 5th move (5... h5) was a "theoretical novelty". It has never been played by a master in my database. I strongly suspect that this is because your suggestion of 6. h4 is a strong and obvious response to a GM, not to mention that they have the option to ignore it altogether like I did (and hopefully defend more successfully). 6. h4 would be my normal response to h-pawn nonsense when I am fianchettoed, but I felt "disrespected" by this guy's spewy openings. My thought process was basically "**** you!" lol. Oops! This guy is hilarious... he played the wing gambit against my Sicilian last time and decided to thrown in a "king's gambit" for good measure when I put a pawn on e4. Excellent point about his attack being somewhat obvious and systematic. The tournament director at my other chess club (a USCF master) lectured me hardcore about allowing similar exchange sacrifices on h4 (h5 as black) earlier this year. I reluctantly agreed with him at the time, but my ego took over in this game lol.

TimM, I also looked at 6. h4 in my analysis after the game and agree that it looks quite good. Not only is it sound, but it also forces my opponent to play positional chess for a bit which is likely a weakness for a guy who spews in the opening like this lol. As you mention, this is a guy who will likely play for g5 which could ruin his position and allow me to thrash him in the center. This guy plays so wild that I think he would likely skip f3 and just play g5 as soon as it becomes humanly possible to do so. I also agree that cxd5 was a better option. I even should have made time to play it after I went for Nxh4... after all, the Rd8 kill shot was made possible due to leaving my pawn on c4. And then there's the whole "meet an attack on the wing with a campaign in the center" concept lol. I was pretty overwhelmed by the sheer number of possible continuations for White. I don't much like how I played c4 in response to ...h5 only to "cover up" and defend with my slow e3 and Nd2-f3 idea. It felt inconsistent even in game time. I also saw lines where I allow h3 and put my bishop on h1, but I had never played such a position before and wanted to stay in my "comfort zone" which obv failed since I got so confused.

All-in, that sucked pretty hard lol... I don't think I have ever had my king hunted across the board like that in a USCF-rated game. Most of my losses involve material loss in the middlegame based on a tactical error that is often the result of my own unsound combination.

So ya... defending is hard. I had noticed a pattern of surviving the first wave of an attack only to recklessly expose myself to a 2nd wave when I get pissed and lash out. I survived 2 waves this time before committing suicide, so hopefully this was a step in the right direction!

The senior players at my other chess club tell me "You're a tough player with a lot of good ideas, so why do you keep entering reckless complications when you are obviously strong enough to just grind people to death?" But then the kids tell me "You play like a wuss!"

If you have such great reads on his psychology and style, why the F are you playing mind games with yourself?!? Won't your ego feel pretty good when you make him flounder for 15 moves in a middle game where he can't attack soundly? I'd probably feel better about playing h4 and other solid moves and watching him flip out than check mating him. You obviously want to win more than anything, and you seem to be building a somewhat universal style, so practice using it if/when you know your opponents psychology.

Also, read chess for zebras and/or 7 deadly sins. I have only read pieces and not the games but they are probably the best psychological books involving chess available.

7 Deadly Chess Sins is basically my bible.

Amen.

Chess for Zebras is awesome too.

A very strange post imo? I feel like I fully acknowledged just about every aspect of my screwups in this game without going into a bunch of variations. I definitely fully acknowledged that playing with my ego may have cost me the game. I agreed that playing h4 was a much better idea. So I have no idea why you are dropping f bombs and yelling at me when you are mostly just repeating what I already said. Maybe you only ready my response to you? My response to TimM might make it more clear that I fully acknowledged my mistakes and will do my best to fix them in the future. The fact that I openly admit these things to myself and others can only be a good thing imo. Do you want me to go flog myself and repeat "I will not allow exchange sacrifices on h4 to maniacs... I will not allow exchange sacrifices on h4 to maniacs... I will not allow exchange sacrifices on h4 to maniacs..."?

Thank you for the book recommendation though! That looks awesome and the reviews are excellent!

Not that you do or don't realize you made mistakes. It's just that I recommend using your ego and desire to win to go into the get looking to use his style against him. I think that way you would have taken a different approach rather than sort of trying to take the bull by the horns so to speak. Trying to be encouraging actually lol because that sounds like a v useful psych read.

AIM - do you chess anymore? I've always liked your chess posts here and TZ .

I'm semi retired.

I've been trying out new openings online just to play more fresh positions and to try to have more fun. Haven't bogged myself down in the minutia of them yet though. Which I'll need to do before I play them over the board.

Thank you thank you. Ah yes TZ, the best NBA thread on the internetz.

Was going to absolutely light Yugo up for this, but decided to wait until after we played/studied today lol. He is now officially forgiven since he is such an awesome study partner!

Ehh, light me up anyway, like you almost did in our first game.

Something was probably misinterpreted from my end or yours though in regard to this conversation.

Electronic communication isn't the best for conveying emotion.

In fact I find it to be quite...



Lacking.

No worries... even if you are repeating yourself, I know that you are right because the veterans at my chess club keep saying the same thing lol.

Don't you dare talk about my mother like that!!!

LOL that dumb *****?

It takes her two hours to watch Sixty Minutes!

Highlight of our two game mini-match was Unguarded accusing me of playing grandpa openings. And not reaching the endgame in either of them.

OH SNAP

Tbf, I probably do play grandpa openings, lol.

Once saw a lecture with the late GM Edmar Mednis. He was talking about how just because you have a "must win" game, doesn't mean you have to go crazy. The game he went over started with 1.d4 and 2.c3, a move which he called more worthy of a grandmother than a grandmaster.

Tantric chess ftw

If you think c3 is crazy, I sometimes play both c3 *and* e3 without moving my DSB first.

Looks like they've been drinking over at Fide

Or taking MDMA.

I enjoyed this article about chess prodigies from The Ringer.

I'm looking to join a chess club or group online. So please hook me up AtCherryFindom on chess.com

thanks.