Perth Open

Here are three of my game I have played today. I think I deserve a bollocking (sp)? from you guys. Yep I lost all three games.

  I lost on time.

On my second round had a bye so on the third rd, second game, I resigned.

 on my third game, fourth rd got checkmated.

06

Here guys here my games for today, got three more tomorrow.

On your first game:

I don't know too much about philidor theory (the opening that was played in this game), but that 3...Nf6 isn't considered that great for black and that dxe5 may be an alternative way for a great game to your Nc3. You get a great position if black tries to take on e4 (but he more or less has to, can't really recapture the e5 pawn

(Qxd8 Kxd8 Ne5 with Nf7 threat, white will remain a pawn up with a much more developed position and a safer king).

So 3...Nf6 4.dxe5 Nxe4 5.Bc4 and white has a nicer position than he usually gets with this opening.

5.Bb5 what is the bishop doing on b5? why would you want to induce ...c6 with tempo, which helps black anyway? not sure. 5.Bc4 I would understand, in this position, the bishop knows what he's doing there.

hmmm giving two pieces for a rook and pawn in the early middlegame is very wrong. If there's nothing that suggests that two black minor pieces won't be able to actively participate in the game, black will just have too much firepower.

I think black's position may be technically won after 12...Kxf7, and in the very least, black has a huge advantage.

For some reason, black is working with his pawns, not pieces in the next few moves, and works very hard to ensure his own minor pieces are blocked away from the action, making the position interesting again:)

18. Nf5 looks like such a natural move doesn't it? However, it's "?" in this position.

Chess can't really be played without any tactical thouts backing up our moves. Principles are very important to guide your thoughts in the right directions, but you need to make sure the move that is correct in principle actually works...

18.Nf5? just hangs a pawn, and what's maybe even worse, opens the center for black's more numerous pieces.

20...Qc8 probably wins the f5 pawn as well. since 21.Qd3 is answered by 21...Nf4 and if 22. Qc4+ Kg7 white is just coming under a huge attack now.

That minor piece isn't going anywhere anytime soon: 22.g3 just invites 22...Nh3+ 23.Kg2 g4 and blak need only bring his queen to the kingside to finish things off. Queen and two knights and a pawn or 2 will destroy black's king.

However, even after ...Qb6 black still has a huge advantage.

Both sides make some mistakes later, but the position just swings from a large black's advantage to a certainly winning one, back and forth.

When the queens come off, white is already worse both from the positional and material point of view.

Black has an easy win all the way to 42.Rh1, where, inexplicably, he plays 42...Ne4? horrible error. throws away the win I think. may in fact reverse the score:)

(42...Rg8 just starts an endgame mating attack against which white has no defense. unless he returns to passivity,leaving black's more numerous pieces an easy job.)

43.g4+ wins the knight:) I've analyzed the position a bit and strangely enough, it seems black's position was so great that EVEN this huge blunder may not win for white. but at least it's either a white win or a draw if you keep your cool and find the mistake:)

43.Ra6 just gives black the chance to get back on the winning horse: 43...Nf2+.

Interesting game. I don't think you realize how bit a mistake was the capture on f7 in that position.

Second game:

5...Bb6 has long been considered a very bad line for black. Strange one to play, especially considering 5...exd4 gives black a nice position. (basically, you'll usually get 5...exd4 6.cxd4 Bb4+ and now either 7.Bd2 Bxd2+ 8.Nbd2 d5, undermining white's central advantage or 7.Nc3 Nxe4 8.0-0 and white will have a nice initiative while you have an extra pawn. both normal)

6...Ne7 instead of 6...Na5 seems to keep it more interesting:)

After you lose a whole piece, well...It's lost. No more comments required from there. You're just praying for a mistake after that.

Note that 5...Bb6 can get you into a lot of trouble even if you play correctly. For example, white is not forced to let you play 6.d5 Ne7. He can go for 6.dxe5 and how are you going to get that central pawn back? if by 6...Ng4 then 7.Bxf7+ Kxf7 8.Ng5+ Kf8 9.Qxg4. White has a magnificent position.

wow thank you grolich, I will look into it tomorrow,  but it was the first time for me to be in a otb tournament so I wasn't all that prepared for it .

Third game: 9.Ng5 just gives away a pawn for no good reaosn.

Black is by no means forced to retreat with 12...N5c6, althogh it leaves him with a great game too, but can also play 12...Nc4, which would be...well, saying it would be uncomfortable for white seems to be an understatement.

And in this game too. Once you lose a whole piece a few moves later, game is finished. You get no other chance till the end.

You didn't mention your rating.

From around 1500, a piece up for no real compensation tends to win the game most of the time, and instant resignation is not uncommon. From around 1700-1800, most players will resign immediately after losing a piece (and expect you to do the same if you are a piece down).

when you get a bit higher... it becomes pointless.

With a piece down, your only salvation is a huge blunder by the opponent. Which is why I Was asking about your rating. Your actions will depend on your playing level. At around 1300, as another example, winning and losing pieces just happens all the time during the game... so resignation may not be smart at that stage...

Since most people like to make tactical suggestions, I'll go the other way: here's some strategic considerations for you.

Game 1: Once you've traded B+N for R+P, try to open the board as quickly as you can! Your extra rook will only count against the opponent's B+N combo once the board opens. Minor pieces lose value gradually as the board opens up, while rooks gain value. Another strategic concern would be, avoid making exchanges that force you to damage your pawn structure. I'm talking about 18. Nf5 and allowing 26...Qxc4. Your pawn structure becomes anemic after these exchanges, especially #2, plus I think both lost a pawn. Don't forget the pawns!

Game 2: Once the opponent sets up his "large center" in the Italian Game, you should trade off your e-pawn to weaken his center somewhat. Strike back later with other pawn pushes to destroy the center. Also, dropping pieces is bad. In addition, when an opponent makes a threat on a piece or square, DON'T answer with another threat unless your threat is more dangerous. I'm talking about 8...c4? I know, at the time there wasn't a square to put the knight on, but just take the advice at face value - you can only answer a threat with a threat if you have a more imminent threat to pose. For instance, if a minor piece is threatened by a pawn, you could, say, threaten mate or a skewer to buy some time.

Game 3: Once again, the pawns are important - not recapturing allowed your opponent to dominate the center and later, to trap the Bishop. Just recapture pieces and pawns when you have to do so, don't try fancy things. Not recapturing the pawn was what put you in the most danger in the middlegame, because your undeveloped queenside could not face the advancing blitz of your opponent's pawns. So the other piece of advice stemming from that is, finish development! Your pieces are nearly always useless sitting on their home squares.

Last bit of very general advice - moving the Nf3 to g5 rarely works, it's usually a waste of time except in openings that call for it (Fried Liver attack and other Italian Game lines). Just complete development normally and don't try to attack until that's done, or you'll get wiped out.

thank you steevmartuns for your comment, to  grolich no I don't have otb rating because I haven't been to a club or anything like that. The first two games the opponents rating were in the 1700's and the third game he was in the 1400's (elo ?)

Ok. Hmmm, in that case, I'll be able to tell more from your perspective:

How do you consider "piece down without sufficient compensation" positions?

Do you treat them as positions in which nothing can really be done even if you play your best, and your only hope is for your opponent to commit his own huge blunder, or do you still think you may have a way to save it if you play well (that is, you're not counting on miracle mistakes and believe you have a chance anyway)?

The only exception I'd like to point out (which I don't think is covered under your "no significant compensation") is in deep endgames where there's very little material left and a chance that you can trade down to a position where the extra piece doesn't matter. The most extreme ccase is B+K vs. K or N+K vs. K.

unlucky

Granted.

Though, in order for that to happen, you have to be already extremely close to such a position.

You'd be surprised (or not...) how many 1500 players answer to what were they hoping for in that piece down position, they'll say: "Well, if I exchange only these 3 pieces and these 4 pawns... I'm in a drawn endgame despite te piece down...", not realizing they can't have that much control of where the position is going when they're just down a piece.

As long as it's understood that you either have to be REALLY close to such a position, or already there for that to be realistic, fine. Other than that, of course you're absolutely right with that addition:)

Its difficult for me at least to analyse much into games with errors like these.

With white you attempted attacks on f7 which is a good idea in many positions.

With black you were unlucky with the early piece drop on the queenside.

Given more otb practice you will be able to improve on both counts, good luck.

You are right 87654321 I do need some more practice on the otb and hopefully I will improve thank you 87654321