OJ vs. fussylizard- 1/2 - 1/2
What a game. OJ opened with 1.d4 for the first time I can remember and played something reminscent of the London system. There were some tactics that worked out better for me and I came out with tremendous pressure on the c-file which shortly led to a blunder and I went up a rook. Then, several moves later in a completely winning position, I changed my move I was going to play right before I played it. I thought I had already analyzed it and thought it was fine, and I actually thought to myself that I should do a blunder-check, but after seeing just over 20 minutes on my clock I hurriedly played the move and got what I deserved for such an oversight. Bam! OJ takes my bishop and forces a draw by perpetual check even though I was still up an exchange. In a brief moment I had thrown all my hard work away. So the lessons of the day- never change your move at the last moment, and always do a blunder check.
Link to replay the game with my commentary.
posted by fussylizard @ 8:12 PM
9 Comments:
I allways like it when opponents change their openings repertoire because of me.
Thanks for sharing the richly annotated game. It's always instructive to see what a player was thinking during the course of a game.
I like 13.Nxf4 better than 13.Nxc8. In your variation after 15...Qxc8, Black's minor pieces and extra pawns look stronger than White's extra rook with the lack of open files, not to mention White's pawn weaknesses.
Fritz found 18...e5!, driving the knight away from protection of g2. 19.Nd3 e4 20.Nb4 Qg4+ 21.Ke1 Qxg2.
After 20.Qd2, stronger is the simple 20...Qc4+, since 20...Rxa3 allows 21.Rxa3 Bxd2 22.Rxa7+ Kf6 23.Kxd2.
I've made those one-move blunders in tournament games, and it really is great motivation to work on your thought process. Fortunately this type of correction is very simple: just add a blunder check on each move. Some players write their move down first, and do the blunder check before making the move. I've had several tournament games where my opponent wrote down a blunder and then later scratched it out and made a better move.
The practice of writing your move down first isn't allowed anymore since july 1, according to the FIDE it is considered to be analysis.
Right, and there's talk of it possibly being overturned since a lot of people aren't happy with the rule. For us in the USCF it's still allowed. I used to do it, but I've started not doing it just in case I ever do play in a FIDE event.
Tempo,
Yeah, that is nice, isn't it. :-)
Chris,
Thanks for the extra analysis- I will definitely check into it when I get home. I don't think I ran all my variations through Fritz, so I'll have to check them.
Some quick thoughts on your suggestions: I thought the play for black after 13.Nxf4 was more straightforward (just pile up on the open c file) which is why I preferred the 13.Nxc8 for white. I should definitely look a little deeper, though, esp. if you prefer that line as black. Of course against precise defense, I wonder if the c file pressure can be countered without offering some other concession?
I recall seeing the ...e5 move in the computer analysis, but IIRC it seemed to be a bit more messy (and I think there was also a nice tactical trap white could hope black might fall into). IIRC there were more open lines and such that gave white more counterplay, but I'll have to look at it again.
Good call after 20.Qd2. Taking the rook does seem much stronger.
RE: The thought process, I know that is my biggest weakness now, so I just need to figure out a solid way to focus on fixing it. I'm thinking about playing some games against the computer with a checklist and forcing myself to use the checklist for every move. Maybe ask my wife watch me and force me to do it... :-)
With the 13.Nxf4 line, if White had played 15.Na5 it doesn't look so bad for White to me. Black's king is a little exposed, making winning the extra a-pawn and developing the h8-rook not so easy. Anyway, I'd rather take White after 15.Na5 than the 13.Nxc8 line. But what do I know? :)
Let me know how your work on thought process goes. I've tried writing one down and following it in games against the computer. I never get very far following it :) It's not easy to strike a balance between improving your thinking during play and turning it into a dry, mechanical effort. The only progress I've made is to keep the structured thought process extremely simple and short.
I'll have a closer look at that line.
If I find the magic system for fixing my thought process, I'll be sure to let everyone know!
Thanks for sharing your game. Sucks you dropped the bishop but everything is a learning experience. You were playing very solid chess, and you're tactical skills shined through when you picked up the rook. Congrats on a nice game, and not to mention a really cool website/pgn viewer set up.
i think your link to harmless is wrong. on a separate topic, way to play! you seem to be getting closer to OJ's strength.
Post a Comment
<< Home