Last post of the week and this time I am sharing a game that I played at ChessRex.com. This is one of the two games I played against Rawalpindi. Unfortunately I won both games due to a timeout, so they seem a bit unfinished because of that. The game below started on May 2nd, 2016 and finished on May 23rd, 2016. The ratings of the players seen in the notation are the ones that they had today when I looked them up. For some reason the ratings are not automatically added to the pgn-files that I can get from ChessRex. It is not really a big deal, but I always forget to add the ratings to the files after the games have finished.
I started the game by opening diagonals for my bishops and taking precence in the center. My opponent took a bit different approach, but also one that was playable. I would not have replied to 1.d4 with f5, but the game continuation does seem reasonable for both sides, well at least up to the point when my opponent played 4...Ne6. While perhaps not a big mistake, it would have given me some play, had I replied with 5.d5. I am not sure if I considered that option all that long, I usually just try to finish development as soon as possible, so I went for 5.Nc3 instead. Rawalpindi replied with c6, which probably is designed to lessen the effect that d5 would cause. I did not handle the position all that well and actually played the silly 6.dxe5. If I were to end up in that position again, I would not play 6.dxe5, but instead the better looking move 6.d5. Had I played d5, the bishop on b8 would have been stuck a bit longer behind the pawn, but because I played 6.dxe5, the bishop has easier time to activate itself. Due to my 6th move, I ended up on the worse side of the board. Rawalpindi obviously replied with 6...dxe5 and I continued with 7.Qd3 in order to bring my queen into play and generate some threats. 7.Qd3 was not a good idea, because it just provoked e4, opening up the diagonal for the bishop on b8 even more. On two consecutive moves I just helped my opponent to get a piece that seemed blocked behind pawns to get into the game. I was obviously on the worse side of things after that but I was not anywhere near of losing the game just yet. Then, on move 9, my opponent made a bad decision and played b6. Rawalpindi should have played 9...Nb6 instead. Rawalpindi's 9th move allowed me to fight evenly again, which at first I was able to do. Thanks to 10...Ba6, my position seemed even brighter. Again I was able to play a good reply and I took the advantage for a few moves until I made a poor choice and went for 13.g3 in order to defend the pawn on h2. It did not look like a promising move, but I did not know what else to do. The remainder of the game went quite evenly again. I have added one mate in one, one mate in two, one mate in three and two mate in four puzzles today. Until Monday, my fellow chess960 enthusiasts!
No comments:
Post a Comment