Tuesday, December 21, 2010

Chess Snapshot Analysis #6 - Can you spot any improvements?

There are improvements on both sides, can you find them?

jrobichess makes chess videos and has a chess blog along with a personal chess site at http://www.jrobichess.com.


Yogesh said...

Hey Nice game dude...

Though not analyzed thoroughly..But still, what eever i have seen, it was a good game.

Wales said...

Great play. I looked at this for fun after move 23 b/c I felt like there might be a faster mate or mate where you didn't lose the initiative by Rf1. I thought the immediate double queen thrust on the H file planning Qxg7 would work better, but the continuation was too long for me to do mentally. So, I went to rybka, which obviously doesn't make human mistakes, and it prefered the line I mentioned only because your opponent blundered by Qf6 rather than Qxg5 (w.perfect play, you would have mated him/her on or around move 43). Qh7...Qh8...Qxg7 would've resulted in mate on or around move 36 with perfect play.

That said, well done and your line was certainly more artful than the brute force I suggested. Thank God we don't have to play head to head with Rybka.

Skanda Prasad said...

i'm an utter beginner at chess JRobi, but I'm still scratching my head as to how black lost this one. For the most part, black was the one initiating attacks, but it wasnt a coherent strategy - just simple tactical attacks that didnt get anywhere.

Especially when white was evidently going to castle on the kingside, and seems to have started preparing for Blacks kingside castle too (Bg4 in move 4), Black didnt immediately free up space and start attacking white's kingside coherently (Bishop alone wasnt nearly enough). Also, did black really have to castle that early? He could've used that move to free up more space to bring out his powers ... Correct me if I'm wrong, but I feel that Black not moving his pawns (esp the queen's pawn) cramped him up and killed his own attack. Also, 7) ... Nd4 appears to me to be a blunder, especially since black had neither developed the other pieces nor protected the position enough - a knight sacrifice got him nothing - it didnt even open up the kingside, did it? Can someone explain the possible rationale for that move then? I'd have probably gone in for 7) ... Kg4, although thats just me, and i'm a horrible chess player anyway