2014 Sinquefield Cup is LIVE! Open to ALL MEMBERS! Join GM Ashley, GM Seirawan and WGM Shahade! Click here to watch!
Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

Beaten despite having what looked like an advantage at the end.


  • 15 mesi fa · Cita · #1

    DaveChild

    Hi! I've not been playing long (played a bit when I was a kid, and enjoying playing again now, despite the odd moment of head-banging stupidity). Had a game against a higher-ranked opponent, and I thought that towards the end I had what should have been a game-winning advantage. Would anyone like to tell me where I went wrong (either in the end game or earlier - I know there are a few foul-ups in there).

    I've added notes through the game, as best I can remember. I figure that at turn 40 I should have a decisive advantage, but fluffed it. And 49.b5 was a mistake I'm still kicking myself over.

  • 15 mesi fa · Cita · #3

    jonnin

    46 Nxh3+ seems better...?  But I am not certain of it.



  • 15 mesi fa · Cita · #4

    DaveChild

    Thanks, Bonesy1116. I didn't really think about pawn structure from 20.g5, but now you mention it it seems obvious that that would make a mess of things.

  • 15 mesi fa · Cita · #5

    DaveChild

    Thanks jonnin. I wasn't sure about the rook swap, especially with a pawn race going on, but I figured that the knight advantage would count for more with the rooks off the board. I was also a bit worried that I couldn't defend my pawns from a rook as easily as he could, as mine were in a terrible arrangement and distant from the King.

  • 15 mesi fa · Cita · #6

    MarvinTheRobot

    It is difficult to defend against multiple pawns by just having a knight. You must play precisely to win. It's a better decision to keep the rooks on the board as they are better defenders and can counterattack very easily.

  • 15 mesi fa · Cita · #7

    JamieKowalski

    I think 54... f6 looks like a mistake. 54... Nxb4 55. d6 a5 might work for a tricky draw. 

  • 15 mesi fa · Cita · #8

    yeres30

     The trick here to win for Black is to ---- (1) Create a passed pawn----- (2) Transpose  into a theoretically winning K+P vs. K+P ending with a Distant Passed Pawn - by Sacrificing the N for one of the 2 passed pawns                   
          

Torna a inizio pagina

Pubblica la tua risposta: