I managed to get over 1800 finally at Red Hot Pawn, took me about 10 years... Okay, I was not playing actively there in some of those years or at all but still. Had I remained a non-subscriber there it might have taken me many more years and or months. That is mainly because free members only get to play six games simultaneously there. Now I have over 140 games in progress there which, of course, helps to increase or sometimes decrease my rating much faster than if I only played only six games at a time. I seen people increase their rating around 300 points a day, but that of course is very rare as it needs a lot of games to end in the same day. I am hoping to get to 1900 there as well at some point but that might take several months or it could be a matter of days, it all depends how fast games end and if I manage to win more than I lose. I think I my winning percentage is around 72 there. It may seem quite a lot, but I guess I have mainly played against lower rated people there.
The game featured inaccurate moves during the first eight moves, but the first really horrible move of the game was played by me on move 9 when I moved my bishop to f5. It was actually so bad move that it could have been the losing move. The reason why the bishop is so badly placed at f5 is seen in the continuation 10.fxe5 Nxe5?? 11.Nxe5 Rxe5 12.d4 and the piece on f5 is lost. Therefore a better reply to 10.fxe5 would be 10...Nd7 and be content with the loss of a pawn.
Unfortunately for my opponent, he or she did not play the move 10.fxe5 and moved the king to h1 instead. With that move SavyNL went from a position where he or she had a winning advantage to being clearly worse. However, in order to get that clear advantage, I needed to play 10...e4. In the game I moved my queen to d7 in order to connect the rooks and maybe protect the bishop so that it could go to h3 and maybe trade the light-squared bishops later on. The next turning point in the game came after the move 16...Ne3. In that position my opponent moved the threatened rook to b1, which seems like a good idea at first, it is placed on a semi-open file where it attacks the pawn on b7, but the rook was already on a semi-open file where it could attack the doubled pawns on the f-file. Maybe SavyNL did not like to move the rook to f2, because it could be answered with Ng4 and repetition of moves would be possible.
I then played the very tempting move 17...Qh3 and the initiative was on my side, at least for the time being. It was not the most accurate move in the position and it did not start a dangerous attack, because my opponent was able to easily deal with the moves I came up with. The engine recommends the move 17...c5 at depth 33. The game continued to be played in a relatively equal way up to the move 24...R3e5. SavyNL moved the e-pawn to e4 in order to further protect the on f5, but it was insufficient because I had the square e4 under my control.
Because of that I won a pawn, but things were not that easy for me and actually I messed up very soon after I had won the pawn. The game continued with the moves 25...dxe4 26.Qe2 and then I foolishly took the knight on f5 with my rook. I should have taken on d3 with my pawn first, so that I could have remained clearly on the driver's seat. The knights would have been traded in both cases, but I would have had an extra pawn and the king could have taken the knight on f5, allowing it to have more squares to go to. The next diagram shows the position in which the last blunder of the game was played.
I moved the attacked rook to e5, which allowed the very nasty check at g4 with the queen. I had to go to h6 with my king and then SavyNL played 32.Rxe5 and I was lost no matter what I did, so I resigned after seeing the move. The pawn can't take the rook because of the reply 33.Qg5# and if the rook takes it, then Qxd7 wins the game.
No comments:
Post a Comment