The Student Room Group

Chess games

Scroll to see replies

Original post by 1 8 13 20 42
...can I haz semi-final in that case :colone:


I'll track him down first, so don't get too excited. :colonhash:
Original post by 1 8 13 20 42
Yeah, either it happened twice or I'm mixing up two games. :tongue: Swear I remember Kasparov on the other side of the board though...

Indeed videos, or just doing some study in general, are possibly superior to playing at the lower levels, at least blitz or bullet.

e4-e5 theory is terrifying (not that sicilian theory is much better, but I tend to feel less on edge with it) so I try to avoid it. But certainly many of the resulting positions are rich and instructive, from what I recall of watching great games from said positions. A good tip is to go into custom and change your minimum to -50, it, obviously, increases the probability of getting somebody higher rated than you, and if they are lower rated than you it won't be by a lot. But yeah honestly I swear Bowdler is the most common response I face. Nf3 is probably second lol. Mainlines seem more common when I play d4, most people go for typical set-ups.


That's true, by avoiding e5 I'm dodging Ruy Lopez, King's Gambit, Scotch, Danish, Italian and all that malarky. Maybe I'll just stick with c5 now that I think about it XD.

It is a bit embarrassing though that the most common opening we play against is the Bowdler, shows how good some of our opponents are lol.
Original post by Electrospective
I'll track him down first, so don't get too excited. :colonhash:


My game didn't happen, because when i clicked to play i got hit by a denial of service attack, which may or may not be related to the opponent, and after that he has ignored all of my messages.

Do you think it is worth setting up a new tournament?

John....
Original post by john2054
My game didn't happen, because when i clicked to play i got hit by a denial of service attack, which may or may not be related to the opponent, and after that he has ignored all of my messages.

Do you think it is worth setting up a new tournament?

John....


Oh okay, strange. :s-smilie:

Is it okay if we finish this one, you can win by default. (:
Original post by Electrospective
Oh okay, strange. :s-smilie:

Is it okay if we finish this one, you can win by default. (:


okay i will pm my opponent again, and if he doesn't reply by another day or so i will take the win, thanks.
Original post by john2054
okay i will pm my opponent again, and if he doesn't reply by another day or so i will take the win, thanks.


Okie dokes. (:
Original post by Electrospective
Okie dokes. (:


Okay i have told him, i will let you know what he says.....
Original post by john2054
Okay i have told him, i will let you know what he says.....


Okay cool, lemme know tomorrow. There's only a few "matches" left :tongue:
I wanna play too🤗
Original post by samerf
I wanna play too🤗


https://lichess.org/TfbV0Onk
I'll play you xD


I'll wait 5 mins before joining anyway :wink:
Extremely angry at myself, saw a basic game winning tactic the split second I missed it and played another (stupid) move: https://www.chess.com/live#g=1711666727
After back rank check Bh7+ obviously wins. I can't play that frustrated with myself, so I resigned.

Aww thanks 🙂
Original post by samerf
Aww thanks 🙂

🙂
Currently playing LifeIsFine atm, but I'll play when I'm next free.
Original post by samerf
Aww thanks 🙂

https://lichess.org/f6E9ssz4 join here if you want to play.


XOR_ nm about the rematch.
Gonna call it a day now lol.
Original post by LifeIsFine
XOR_ nm about the rematch.
Gonna call it a day now lol.

Okay, ggs, I'll be on tomorrow :wink:.
Original post by IrrationalRoot
That's true, by avoiding e5 I'm dodging Ruy Lopez, King's Gambit, Scotch, Danish, Italian and all that malarky. Maybe I'll just stick with c5 now that I think about it XD.

It is a bit embarrassing though that the most common opening we play against is the Bowdler, shows how good some of our opponents are lol.


I'll probably end up playing it at some point, but I might prep myself by watching some opening videos first. Otherwise I'll probably just blunder everything lol.

Yeah it's much more common in blitz for me. The faster the time control, the more permissible crap openings are. I played a guy in bullet, we drew 8-8, and it was so annoying because I knew his openings were a pile of crap, he'd play Scandinavian (okay, this is playable - but it's not the most ambitious try surely) and Grand Prix attack stuff, but there was little time for me, less versed in these systems, to work out how to best beat them, and he just kept getting great positions.
Original post by 1 8 13 20 42
I'll probably end up playing it at some point, but I might prep myself by watching some opening videos first. Otherwise I'll probably just blunder everything lol.

Yeah it's much more common in blitz for me. The faster the time control, the more permissible crap openings are. I played a guy in bullet, we drew 8-8, and it was so annoying because I knew his openings were a pile of crap, he'd play Scandinavian (okay, this is playable - but it's not the most ambitious try surely) and Grand Prix attack stuff, but there was little time for me, less versed in these systems, to work out how to best beat them, and he just kept getting great positions.


After playing a couple of games just then I've realised that my strategic understanding is still very poor. Even when my opponents play terrible moves I can't improve my position properly; ok if they make a move which gives me an obviously strong move/tactical sequence I'll play it, but otherwise I can't seem to do anything. I guess I'll have to wait until I can start playing OTB until I improve; I don't see myself improving online since I always feel so lost against any reasonable play from my opponent.

Something that would be useful (probably for both of us) is to find a way to make the games more complicated. I think that would help you in particular given your tactical ability, because if the position is lifeless/simple, any patzer could play solid moves against you for the whole game. I've noticed I keep unintentionally getting dead positions despite a stronger position in the opening and then the game fizzles out into an endgame that could go either way.
Original post by IrrationalRoot
After playing a couple of games just then I've realised that my strategic understanding is still very poor. Even when my opponents play terrible moves I can't improve my position properly; ok if they make a move which gives me an obviously strong move/tactical sequence I'll play it, but otherwise I can't seem to do anything. I guess I'll have to wait until I can start playing OTB until I improve; I don't see myself improving online since I always feel so lost against any reasonable play from my opponent.

Something that would be useful (probably for both of us) is to find a way to make the games more complicated. I think that would help you in particular given your tactical ability, because if the position is lifeless/simple, any patzer could play solid moves against you for the whole game. I've noticed I keep unintentionally getting dead positions despite a stronger position in the opening and then the game fizzles out into an endgame that could go either way.


I know what you mean. So often I'm developing my pieces to decent squares, I think, gaining central control, doing all the principled things, but nothing really comes of it. I've certainly found that complications can aid things, but I also need to have a good position. I find myself, as I'm not treating every move like tactics trainer, to sometimes make woeful oversights in that regard, even if my absolute ability to figure out the tactics of a position is quite good. I mean I'm playing a game right now where my opponent has been tactically walking all over me, I even hanged a piece (well, I had to stop mate on the kingside, so I can forgive myself for not even looking at that piece, over on the queenside, which couldn't aid anything - and my opponent had already sacrificed one).
Well, paused to actually concentrate on that game. It fizzled out to an ending. I had a knight, he had a bishop. He had four pawns, I had three, but he had doubled pawns. I'm quite happy with the play here...I dunno how accurate I was (I probably could have used opportunities to push pawns earlier rather than dilly dallying) but it's a nice illustration of the knight's limitations. Made up for the middlegame (which I was probably losing by force, as usual I moved too fast, I'll check with the engine) https://www.chess.com/live/game/1711767114

edit: lol in hindsight I was worried about far too much on the kingside. I was up over -2, then hanging my knight indeed puts white easily winning (+3). I really should have thought more. Got too scared by the way the position looked and ignored the actual mechanics and particulars of the position.
double edit: lmao computer announces mate in 10 on move 24 for white. But he didn't find it, and I cannot be blamed for my opponent's failings. :colonhash:
(edited 7 years ago)

Quick Reply

Latest