64 square madness that some of us call chess...: A36 Symmetrical English vs ...g6: 4.Bg2 Bg7 (1.c4 c5 2.g3 g6 3.Bg2 Bg7 4.Nc3 Nc6 5.d3 e5 6.e4 Nge7 7.Nge2 O-O 8.O-O d6 9.Be3 Nd4)

A36 Symmetrical English vs ...g6: 4.Bg2 Bg7 (1.c4 c5 2.g3 g6 3.Bg2 Bg7 4.Nc3 Nc6 5.d3 e5 6.e4 Nge7 7.Nge2 O-O 8.O-O d6 9.Be3 Nd4)

This is from the round four of the Lomasäkylä tournament that was played at Eura in 2005. On the first round I won a game against a player who was rated 2063. After that first round, I had lost on rounds two, three, and on this fourth round. So after four rounds I had only one point, which was rather disastrous, though I have to say in my defense that only on this fourth round I faced an opponent that was lower rated than me. Therefore my results might have been expected based on the ratings. This does not mean that I would have been in any way satisfied with my results up to that point, except the first round win of course.

This may be one of the worst games I have played in terms of my tactical awareness, at least according to the judgement that can be seen at the end of the notation. It says there that my precision was only 6%, which means I deserved to lose the game.

New ...

New Game

Edit Game

Setup Position

Open...

PGN

FEN

Share...

Share Board (.png)

Share Board (configure)

Share playable board

Share game as GIF

Notation (PGN)

QR Code

Layout...

Use splitters

Swipe notation/lists

Reading mode

Flip Board

Settings

Move	N	Result	Elo

Replay and check the LiveBook here

1.c4 c5 2.g3 g6 3.Bg2 Bg7 4.Nc3 Nc6 5.d3 e5 6.e4 Nge7 7.Nge2 0-0 8.0-0 d6 9.Be3 Nd4 A36 Symmetrical English vs ...g6:4.Bg2 Bg7 10.Qd2 f5 10...Be6 11.Bh6 f6 12.Bxg7 Kxg7 13.b4 Nec6 14.b5 Nxe2+ 15.Nxe2 Nd4 16.Nxd4 cxd4 17.f4 Qc7 18.a4 a5 19.f5 Bd7 20.h4 Rf7 21.Rf2 Raf8 22.Raf1 b6 23.Bh3 Qd8 24.Bg4 Bc8 25.Qd1 Miezis,N (2548)-Andersen,M (2477) Vaxjo 2013 0-1 (52) 11.f4 LiveBook: 3 Games 11.Bg5 Ne6 12.Bxe7 Qxe7 13.exf5 gxf5 14.f4 11.Bh6 Bxh6 12.Qxh6 fxe4 13.Nxd4 cxd4 14.Nxe4 Nf5 15.Qg5 Bd7 16.Qxd8 Raxd8 17.b4 h6 18.a4 a5 19.Rfb1 Bc6 20.b5 Bxe4 21.Bxe4 b6 22.Rf1 Kg7 23.Ra2 Ne7 24.Kg2 Ng8 25.f3 g5 Khakhutashvili,A (1796) -Petriashvili,N (2167) Lagodekhi 2016 0-1 (39) 11...Rb8 11...fxe4!= 12.dxe4 Bg4 12.Rab1 12.fxe5 dxe5 13.Bg5 12...Nec6 Better is 12...fxe4= 13.dxe4 Nec6 13.Nd5N 13.fxe5 dxe5 14.Nd5 13.a3 a5 14.b3 Be6 15.a4 Qd7 16.Nd5 Rbe8 17.Nec3 Kh8 18.Kh1 Rf7 19.Bxd4 Nxd4 20.Nb6 Qd8 21.Nbd5 Bh6 22.Nb5 Nxb5 23.axb5 Bxd5 24.exd5 exf4 25.gxf4 Rfe7 26.Bf3 b6 27.d4 Re3 Schubert,M-Baramidze,D (2242) Kiel 2000 0-1 (37) 13...Be6 13...fxe4 14.Bxe4 Bg4 15.Nxd4 cxd4 14.fxe5= And now Nxd4 would win. dxe5 14...Nxe2+= keeps the balance. 15.Qxe2 Nxe5 15.Nec3 15.Nxd4± exd4 16.Bf4 15...Qd7 16.Bh6 16.exf5 Bxf5 17.Rf2 16...Rf7 16...f4 17.Bxg7 Qxg7 17.Bxg7 Kxg7 18.Rf2 Rbf8 19.Rbf1 Qd8 20.Bh3 20.exf5= Rxf5 21.a3 20...Bd7 20...f4! 21.Bxe6 Nxe6 21.a3?

21.exf5= Bxf5 22.Bg2 21...g5? 21...f4! keeps the pressure on. 22.Bxd7 Qxd7 23.gxf4 exf4 22.exf5± Bxf5 23.Bg2 23.Bxf5+- Rxf5 24.Rxf5 Rxf5 25.Rxf5 Nxf5 26.Ne4 23...g4 23...b6= 24.Ne4 24.Qe3± 24...Bxe4! 25.Rxf7+ Reject 25.dxe4 Nf3+ 26.Bxf3 gxf3 25...Rxf7 26.Rxf7+ But not 26.dxe4 Nf3+ 27.Bxf3 gxf3 26...Kxf7 27.Bxe4

Strongly threatening Qh6. 27...Nf3+? Black should try 27...Kg7 28.Bxf3!+- gxf3 29.Qh6 Nd4 29...Kg8 30.Kf2 Kh8 31.Kxf3 Qg8 32.Qf6+ Qg7 30.Qxh7+ Ke6 intending ...Qg5. 31.Qg6+ Kd7 32.b4 cxb4 33.axb4 a5 34.Nb6+ Kc7 35.bxa5 Qf8 36.Qh7+ Kc6 37.Qe4+ Kd6 38.Qd5+ Precision: White = 20%, Black = 6%. 1–0

White	EloW	Black	EloB	Res

Raitanen,P

1648

Vierjoki,T

1783

1–0

Below you can see the latest and highest rated games that I could find that reached the position after 9...Nd4 in my reference database.