Would love some commnets about this game. I felt I played inspired chess here...just wish I could play that way every game.

That was a great game, and the intentions behind each move were explained very well.

I liked the game and how your comments made it accessible for a beginner like me. Also, it's nice that the video was not too long. I like to watch a quick one when I take a break from work...

The only thing I was wondering about is this: Your bishop on e6 was really strong. His was also good, but couldn't go much anywhere with yours in the way. In my view, it was kind of predictable that he take yours at some point. With that in mind, why not take it, and force his rook to take back on a2, putting it a little bit out of play, and breaking his piece coordination.

I know it's not much, only one move away, but I don't see that you got anything from the simplification that occured in the actual game.

What am I missing?

Thanks

Vincent

Edit: Well your queen stayed at its new spot for a while, and it was key to the attack. OK so maybe I get it now...

Cool.

I think you missed a couple things in the analysis... you didn't even consider 20...Kg7 instead of Rf7 (I'm curious which one works better and why). In the variation with 22. hxg4 Rh7+, 23...Rh3 is mate; that surely "could get bad"! Looking at various 23rd move alternatives (esp. Nxh3 or g4) could make the lecture even more interesting; explaining the art of attack. I don't understand why 23...Rxh3 is more brilliant than just any attacking move.

Nice play with 19...h5! It looks like the master was very shaken by this move.

Capablanca was asked: how many moves do you look ahead? His reply: "Just one....the best one."

I know I don't see all the variations, and possible outcomes, but I strive to look for what I consider the best move in any position, because what I've noticed in all my time studying chess is that the 3 or 4 best reply’s you can have in most any position can even be seen by a beginner with enough time.

With the exception of games of TAL and Nezhmetdinov and maybe Steinitz, whose games I sometimes look at in total bewilderment, most games by the masters can be followed and ideas understood, most chess problems can be dissected and answered. I believe the statement made by Capablanca was a key to unlocking the simplicity of chess.

He and Morphy were geniuses no doubt, and had special memories to draw from, but I believe with simplicity the beginner and intermediate player can achieve mastery in chess.

With that said: I do not believe one can achieve GM strength without a special mind to memorize thousands of patterns, or have computer like calculating ability.

These are my opinions of course and you are free to disagree.


Move 20 why did I not consider Kg7. I don’t know? Perhaps that would have been better but to answer honestly I don’t often look to move my King.

And moves 23 asking why it is any more brilliant than any other attacking move? I guess it isn’t though I thought it was J

* When making these statements referring to famous GM’s like Capablanca in no way am I comparing myself or my ability to his.

What was the time control for this game?

Brett

Aha... I was really curious so I Fritzed the position...

Okay, Fritz didn't like 20... Kg7 either. I didn't mean to sound overcritical, I'm trying to offer things to consider (like considering alternatives to the line played) but you're right, Kg7 is really strange.

You were right, 23... Rxh3+ was best. My bad.

(23... g4 doesn't work.

23... Nxh3 doesn't allow a slow build-up and crush (Ra7-a8-g8 or whatever) since although 24. Kg2 Ra8 25. Kf1 (or 25. Rh1) Nf4(+) is crushing, White has the tactical shot 25. Nxe5! instead.)


Yeah, it was a great lecture so I guess my suggestion (explaining all key variations) isn't that important or constructive. Good lecture, thanks for sharing.


Yup, Capablanca's quote is a very good one.




My point was more similar to that of GM Kotov: it's necessary (for any non-casual player) to analyze all key variations, especially in a tactical position. It's much easier to do this in a post-mortem analysis and explore, "Well, what if I had tried this?" or "What if I had tried that?" although your positional approach also works very well.



True, but I've made it to 1730 USCF with a really bad memory, regularly getting clobbered in the opening, mostly failing to recognize patterns, and just calculating my way out of really bad disasters and winning the endgame. I can't really disagree with your argument though; you do make several good points.

15 5

Wow, thanks for the comment Triple D.

3.....Bc5. I dont think this is the Berlin. The Berlin is 1.e4-e5 2.Nf3-Nc6 3.Bb5-Nf6. Dennis Monokroussos has a very good video on that line in training videos from the masters. I'm not sure but I think this called the Moller defence but I'm not entirely sure. Very nice kill tho well done. I didn't like whites Bd5. Ok it pinned your Knight because of your rook on a7. However it didn't really threaten anything and was a waste of tempo. White had to look to his own kingside. The master here perhaps seriously underestimated you. Once your Knight came to f5 it turned into an octopus. If a knight reaches a square like that and can't be taken easily it is usually the sign of a strategically won game.

It was the Classical defense in the Ruy Lopez, I believe. I'm not an expert on chess openings, but of all the openings, I'm most familar with the branches of the Ruy. For the classical defense, I think the most common continuation, for white, is actually 4. c3 instead of a3 (taken from Practical Chess Openings by Reuben Fine).

Edit:

Oh, by the way, the berlin would be Nf6 after Bb5.


Oh, and nice game. I enjoyed.

This opening is called the ruy lopez cordel variation (after bc5).
Obviously white is giving up his advantage with the move 4a3?? So if he's a master hes trying to give u some help to get a good game going.

The 3rd move bc5 is is rarely seen by top players, but often at a low level of play, but of course without white contesting the move by playing c3 or just 0-0 of course this move will be a really good move.

I think your plans in this games r off , typicly what u wanna do is just to go for the f5 pawn-push, so dont move the knight again at e7 to g6, which is a move I dont understand (since it just loses a tempo)just move king to h8 and go for f5 and use your fast dev, since hes waisted moves with pawn a3??