| Author |
Message |
|
VideoPoster
Video Manager
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2007 6:17 pm Posts: 524
|
 kamus - Kamus v Moejoe Rnd 3: 02/03/12 [37:40]
Poster: kamus Rating Class: Class B (1600-1800) | Videos Made: 168 Video Tags: Tayler Opening Video Download: Login or register to download this video for your iPhone/iPod Touch Like (Login Required) | Liked By: Sarciness, Fox, Pobble, gentlewhisper, taghera, eimaj |
| |
|
| Fri Feb 03, 2012 11:35 am |
|
 |
|
kamus
Site Moderator
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 1:39 pm Posts: 2458 Location: Maryland, USA
Rating: 1698
Rating Class: Class B (1600-1800)
|
 Re: kamus - Kamus v Moejoe Rnd 3: 02/03/12 [37:40]
Man, do I suck at chess or what!? Obviously, 21.NxR would have won on the spot- of course it's not such a difficult move to see unless you are a total donk. 
_________________ illigetimi non carborundum.
|
| Fri Feb 03, 2012 11:45 am |
|
 |
|
moejoe
Pawn
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2007 3:52 pm Posts: 22
Rating Class: Class D (1200-1400)
|
 Re: kamus - Kamus v Moejoe Rnd 3: 02/03/12 [37:40]
I'm sure I didnt play that opening properly..after losing the g pawn I figured what the hey, might as well throw the kitchen sink at ya.. Bxh7+ was VERY optomistic as you pointed out. After trading Queens, I thought maybe I can hang in there with a semi open file to your king. It's a shame you missed my blunder Rd2, because you totally outplayed me.. Thanks for posting Kamus.. 
|
| Fri Feb 03, 2012 1:44 pm |
|
 |
|
kamus
Site Moderator
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 1:39 pm Posts: 2458 Location: Maryland, USA
Rating: 1698
Rating Class: Class B (1600-1800)
|
 Re: kamus - Kamus v Moejoe Rnd 3: 02/03/12 [37:40]
Thanks Moejoe- you did a very nice job of exploiting my blunder and it was a well-deserved win for you.
_________________ illigetimi non carborundum.
|
| Fri Feb 03, 2012 2:19 pm |
|
 |
|
sfarmer29
Site Moderator
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 4:07 pm Posts: 1379 Location: Tucson, Arizona USA
Rating: 2014U
Rating Class: Expert (2000-2200)
|
 Re: kamus - Kamus v Moejoe Rnd 3: 02/03/12 [37:40]
What can I say, stuff happens. What was funny to me is that when missing the capture you had already made up your mind to move the knight. That looked to be an interesting game and I have a gut feeling that Black may have had a nice attack (instead of taking on h2), lot's of options, but the bishop pair on an open board and open g-file, looks dangerous for White. We all miss stuff, so don't be worried, you are not a donk. I played Joel Banawa a couple weeks ago and dropped a pawn to him at move eight. Lev Altounian was sitting next to me struggling very hard not to laugh. At least I can claim it was a 'Senior Moment' hehe.
_________________ Steve Farmer http://www.youtube.com/user/StoopidBishop?feature=mhee
|
| Fri Feb 03, 2012 3:20 pm |
|
 |
|
Sarciness
King
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 2:38 am Posts: 583
Rating: 1658 FIDE
Rating Class: Class A (1800-2000)
|
 Re: kamus - Kamus v Moejoe Rnd 3: 02/03/12 [37:40]
Not only was 21.Nxd2 completely winning but after if black had have played Rgxg2+ then Kh1 Rh2+ Kg1 R2g2 is a forced mate in 2. Hard lines. Missing black's threat on g2 proved fatal.
_________________ http://www.chessvideos.tv/wiki/index.php/Sarciness%27_Videos
|
| Sat Feb 04, 2012 2:46 am |
|
 |
|
Sarciness
King
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 2:38 am Posts: 583
Rating: 1658 FIDE
Rating Class: Class A (1800-2000)
|
 Re: kamus - Kamus v Moejoe Rnd 3: 02/03/12 [37:40]
P.S. "Chess proves that you're stupid." Couldn't agree more! How many thousands of games of chess have I played and how bad am I?
_________________ http://www.chessvideos.tv/wiki/index.php/Sarciness%27_Videos
|
| Sat Feb 04, 2012 2:49 am |
|
 |
|
Fox
King
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2009 3:48 pm Posts: 455 Location: Germany
Rating Class: Expert (2000-2200)
|
 Re: kamus - Kamus v Moejoe Rnd 3: 02/03/12 [37:40]
Tough loss, kamus, but I know you'll bounce back !
14..Qh4 would have been quite interesting, first move that came to my mind.
_________________ - What's the rumpus?
|
| Sat Feb 04, 2012 7:00 am |
|
 |
|
Pobble
King
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2007 4:59 am Posts: 1391
Rating: 2200
Rating Class: National Master
|
 Re: kamus - Kamus v Moejoe Rnd 3: 02/03/12 [37:40]
Very interesting game. I thought on move 12 that instead of 12.Qxd4 of the double attack 12.Qf3 hitting the rook and threatening mate on f7. The save is obviously 12...Be6 defending the f7 point and uncovering a defence of the rook by the queen. Such things even if they do not work we should try to see. Come on skotlander you got to think of mate! The above idea lends it'self to suggesting 12.Rxf7 Kxf7 13.Qf3+ ( same idea ) Bf5 14.Qxf5+ when for a small investment of material white likely has a winning attack. eg Ke8 15.e6 ( threatening mate ) Qf6 16.Qd5 attacking the rook again, and setting up Bg5 or Qc6+ next. Maybe a computer could defend this ( if at all ) but I doubt a human would last long.
The opening looked very tricky. I will try and remember it.
I think the blunders were due to the time limit and the need to speed up play, when your next move is decided before and played instantly as a reply.
|
| Sat Feb 04, 2012 8:53 am |
|
 |
|
kamus
Site Moderator
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 1:39 pm Posts: 2458 Location: Maryland, USA
Rating: 1698
Rating Class: Class B (1600-1800)
|
 Re: kamus - Kamus v Moejoe Rnd 3: 02/03/12 [37:40]
Thanks for the sympathy guys! I know it happens to us all but it still stings. BTW, the book move that I couldn't quite recall was 7.Nxd4 (instead of 7.Bb5)- my move is OK but Nxd4 is better and white has done well from the resulting positions.
_________________ illigetimi non carborundum.
|
| Sat Feb 04, 2012 10:40 am |
|
|