For once, got the post-game analysis right

…but not the game, of course.

Round 1

I debated between 16..e4? and 16…Na5, 17.Bb3 (saw that this was forced), NxBb3, 18.axN a6. I saw and almost played this line, but it looked a little “boring” so I went for more with a bad pawn sac, yet again.

When I played …Bg4, it somehow escaped my notice that Nf3-g4-d5 would block my pawn. I almost played ..h6 instead of Nd4, but I realized that the pawn was gone anyhow, and I had messed up. I don’t have enough time to calculate some things out, so I believe I sort of “guess” to save some time, but guessing usually means I end up with the nothing there that I saw all along – no fresh insight after playing it, it’s just a bad move.

After the game, I realized that I blew my chance on move 11, could have played …Rf4 here, and I didn’t even notice the pin if 12.Bd3 Bf5 -+/=+. Once again, I guess and rushed this move, hoping that there would still be something of an attack left for me.

I thought after the game that I should not look for big combos, but simply play the …Na5 move and go with my initiative. It “looks” like a draw, but I can play out my initiative and possibly win if he blunders just one more tempo somewhere later on.

..h6 or ..Bf5 would have also been better than the pawn sac, obviously, and had wished I had at least gotten in ..h6 there for later on.

My opponent didn’t analyze with me after the game. That seems to be the rule these days, get up smugly with your ratings points and ask no questions.

Unfortunately, Wednesdays are accelerated in pairings in Round 1 (only), which means that Round 2 is like the “bozo” round, if you lose your Round 1 game in the upper section. Luckily, it’s a 5 round tournament, so anything can still happen.

Perhaps the only cool thing about this game is that little Daniel Herman stopped by and offered to analyze the game with me. I showed him that ..Rf4 move, but with ..Bg4 instead of ..Bf5 follow-up. We looked at that move maybe 2 minutes tops because Alex wanted to go, but I’m happy to have looked at that position with him. It’s a very deep line that Fruit shows, perhaps one day I can pull that sort of thing off at G/90.


3 thoughts on “For once, got the post-game analysis right

  1. Hey LinuxGuy!

    last night I had the best post-mortem I have ever had with an opponent. I agree it is not the norm. But my higher rated opponent asked me if I wanted to go over the game so I said yes. (it happens so rarely!)

    He won the game and going over it was fun! And then the club champion came in and went over some things with us as well.

    Kind of cool!

    Hope chess is treating you well.

    I have raised my measly OTB rating up about 100 points this summer playing in these weekly tournament games. For 2012 my rating is up about 200 points since January. Still very low but I am starting to see things at the board. Even when I make bad moves I at least consider the good move I just make some crappy calculations and pick the wrong move anyway. πŸ™‚

  2. It’s too bad I can’t hold your hand when you doing these sacrifices, really.
    Rf4 looks good. The secret is not in sac, but just being in more or less good physical shape, having peace of mind and being calm and cool. That’s it.
    Then you can show your best side.

  3. TommyG, I am glad you are having fun and getting into it with other strong players in your post-game analyses! πŸ™‚

    RollingPawns, thanks for the sentiment!

    My biggest problem in this game was/is inexplicable use of time during that stage of the game when I think something is there. Honestly, it didn’t feel like I was using anywhere near that much time only to come up with a blunder.

    After the blunder, I still made my last queen move with 29 seconds on my clock, and finished the game with 20 seconds on my clock. During this same period, my opponent spent around 45 minutes. When I played …c5, I knew I was playing my last blunder, but played it quickly with confidence (I knew I should have been playing …Be6). The engine thinks it’s all the same, but it’s much different from a practicality/human standpoint.

    I must lose a bunch of time out of some nervousness, but it seems weird that lack of confidence can just eat up an hour plus from one’s clock. It’s like a time-warp, and I am not nearly quick enough at tactics/attack, need to get quicker at these points of the game. πŸ˜‰

    I spend too much time at the things I struggle at. Honestly, I see GM videos and they make simple moves in the middlegame and I think “How come these moves aren’t obvious to me, but are to them?” and then I see their endgames, and they are suddenly completely unconfident and I feel like I could potentially even smoke grandmasters in an endgame, and probably would.

    Actually, I didn’t even write down the moves to the endgame, but didn’t hesitate on any of the moves when putting them into the engine afterward or when showing them to my friend without the scoresheet. 9 seconds of my own clock-time, he could have played much much faster (and better!) and I still would have easily retained all of the moves, mentally. Really, I spent all of those 9 seconds on one move (correction, I went from 29 seconds to 26, then to 20) and wasn’t even hesitating/using the 5 second delay on any of those other moves other than for the amount of time it takes for a physical movement.

    Speaking of endgames, last Thursday I watched Master Brian Wall win a game against Jason, who is 2002 rated after the tournament. I feel I would have either forced Brian into a draw or loss (if he tries to dodge the draw), understood the many blunders that Jason made and how Brian was immediately taking advantage of them, and I was finding the better moves much more quickly than Jason. Then again, Jason was just 1400 two years ago and I thought endgames were his big weakness. This is where ratings do lie, because G/90 is usually less about an endgame rating, and more about middlegame tactics and clock-management. I can tell that Brian is really good at endgames, but even then have spotted what I feel are flaws in his technique as I’ve watched him blitz these moves out live.

    I think that deep-down, TommyG you are an endgame player like me, and so we like to study the craziest tactical middle-games instead of endgames because that is what gives us the biggest chess-buzz, and what we struggle with most OTB. haha. πŸ˜‰

    RollingPawns, you are the best defensive-player, like to attack with your queen, and have strong endgame technique (amazing how much of a rarity this is nowadays, but it is also the casualty of the quicker time-control formats of today).

    We spend all of our time struggling with our weakpoints, and in G/90 the clock is king!

    Oh, and athletically-speaking, I have been in the worse shape of my life during this downward trend. I can’t deny this! πŸ˜€

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s