The Student Room Group

Chess games

Scroll to see replies

Original post by IrrationalRoot
Put this one through the computer: https://www.chess.com/live/game/1717787331

Yep I resigned in a completely won position. Can't blame myself though, since my annoying parents were telling me to do stuff so had to go anyway. At least at uni I won't be restricted to 1 game a day at very specific times due to the risk of other people ruining my hard-fought games.


Gives you 16 centipawn loss with 2 inaccuracies 17. ...Ne4 and 18. ...Bh4. Final evaluation is -3.63.
Just got a draw against a 1700, but I've beaten them before and I miscalculated a crazy tactical line, which ended up giving me back a pawn I'd lost but losing an exchange I'd won, when I thought it would win a whole rook. In the end it was queen and rook vs queen and rook; had their rook in a pin and it was a draw by perpetual (had to make sure to go to the right squares or the queen would hit my rook and I'd lose material lol, stressful)
Original post by 1 8 13 20 42
Gives you 16 centipawn loss with 2 inaccuracies 17. ...Ne4 and 18. ...Bh4. Final evaluation is -3.63.
Just got a draw against a 1700, but I've beaten them before and I miscalculated a crazy tactical line, which ended up giving me back a pawn I'd lost but losing an exchange I'd won, when I thought it would win a whole rook. In the end it was queen and rook vs queen and rook; had their rook in a pin and it was a draw by perpetual (had to make sure to go to the right squares or the queen would hit my rook and I'd lose material lol, stressful)


Assuming the tactical line was the reason for losing the exchange? If it wasn't not sure why you did that. Anyway once again I'm surprised that a 1700 missed such a basic tactic (a4 and the fork). You had quite a few opportunities to win there; seems like you were a bit tentative in the part of the game where you were up the exchange. He didn't really have any threats at that point so infiltration with the queen would've been quite strong.
Original post by IrrationalRoot
Assuming the tactical line was the reason for losing the exchange? If it wasn't not sure why you did that. Anyway once again I'm surprised that a 1700 missed such a basic tactic (a4 and the fork). You had quite a few opportunities to win there; seems like you were a bit tentative in the part of the game where you were up the exchange. He didn't really have any threats at that point so infiltration with the queen would've been quite strong.


Yeah. Basically, if he can't block that last check with the queen on a nice square, he's toast. For some reason I didn't think of him blocking the way he did, where the queen is protected and only attacked by my queen.

I wouldn't say I was tentative, I was trying to find some kind of attack, going for the check and then preparing the discovery, moving my rook to unblock the diagonal and encourage weakening of the second rank should I get another check in, but there wasn't much to go for, his king was reasonably safe. Unless you mean just mopping up all the pawns. Too boring lol.

Rematch he won easily because of an utterly horrific position in the French.
So that's four 30|0 losses in a row not counting a draw. Wonderful.
Original post by 1 8 13 20 42
Yeah. Basically, if he can't block that last check with the queen on a nice square, he's toast. For some reason I didn't think of him blocking the way he did, where the queen is protected and only attacked by my queen.

I wouldn't say I was tentative, I was trying to find some kind of attack, going for the check and then preparing the discovery, moving my rook to unblock the diagonal and encourage weakening of the second rank should I get another check in, but there wasn't much to go for, his king was reasonably safe. Unless you mean just mopping up all the pawns. Too boring lol.

Rematch he won easily because of an utterly horrific position in the French.
So that's four 30|0 losses in a row not counting a draw. Wonderful.


Yeah that's what I meant, going full-on pacman eating all his second rank pawns lol. Boring but at least your queen would get a full meal XD.

Well like I said it's important to ignore results for now and just play to improve your chess. Winning comes later.
I've noticed that this thread has just turned into a convo between me and 13 lol. Still good chess discussion though.
Original post by IrrationalRoot
Yeah that's what I meant, going full-on pacman eating all his second rank pawns lol. Boring but at least your queen would get a full meal XD.

Well like I said it's important to ignore results for now and just play to improve your chess. Winning comes later.


To be fair that might be what I'd resorted to had I not got overly excited with tactics.

Indeed that's part of the reason why I have the seek set to [my rating - 50, inf). That's the highest minimum it allows I believe.
Original post by Electrospective
I suck at chess. :ahee: But I wanna play chess so....


Let the chess games begin! :colone:

EDIT: SOME OF YOU MAY NOT HAVE FIGURED THIS OUT BUT IT'LL BE AN ONLINE GAME OF CHESS......

Editededit: Quote me or tag me and I'll add you to the list below

Spoiler




How do I play?
Original post by IamJacksContempt
How do I play?


You (or someone else) can set up an open game on lichess and then post the link here.
Original post by 1 8 13 20 42
To be fair that might be what I'd resorted to had I not got overly excited with tactics.

Indeed that's part of the reason why I have the seek set to [my rating - 50, inf). That's the highest minimum it allows I believe.


Yeah that's a good thing to do, most people aren't brave enough to do that lol.
It's funny though, I haven't even changed my rating seek once but I always seem to find players who are 100 rating points higher lol.

Just played a decent game https://www.chess.com/live/game/1718626578.

Upon analysing the game I made a lot less mistakes than I thought, though I still played the early middlegame pretty badly as expected.
I was feeling that I was lost after 14. e5 (which I felt I had to play to stop black from getting super active and smashing me on the e-file; I did consider Rf3 as the computer suggested but thought it looked superficial and even straight up silly).

But after he got greedy and snacked on the c2 pawn I thought I may have something (still knew I was worse) and pushed for an attack, ignoring the potential loss of a pawn in the centre or the b2 pawn etc. Luckily my opponent demonstrated a significant lack of defensive skill and cracked under the pressure
- although it must be said that it is far easier to attack than to defend in chess.

I'm not that happy with my play since I outplayed him in the opening and then more or less threw my advantage away with a seemingly strong Nd5, but I'm happy with my attitude in the sense that I played for activity and an attack on the queenside to try to keep the pressure on despite feeling like resigning.
Original post by IrrationalRoot
Yeah that's a good thing to do, most people aren't brave enough to do that lol.
It's funny though, I haven't even changed my rating seek once but I always seem to find players who are 100 rating points higher lol.

Just played a decent game https://www.chess.com/live/game/1718626578.

Upon analysing the game I made a lot less mistakes than I thought, though I still played the early middlegame pretty badly as expected.
I was feeling that I was lost after 14. e5 (which I felt I had to play to stop black from getting super active and smashing me on the e-file; I did consider Rf3 as the computer suggested but thought it looked superficial and even straight up silly).

But after he got greedy and snacked on the c2 pawn I thought I may have something (still knew I was worse) and pushed for an attack, ignoring the potential loss of a pawn in the centre or the b2 pawn etc. Luckily my opponent demonstrated a significant lack of defensive skill and cracked under the pressure
- although it must be said that it is far easier to attack than to defend in chess.

I'm not that happy with my play since I outplayed him in the opening and then more or less threw my advantage away with a seemingly strong Nd5, but I'm happy with my attitude in the sense that I played for activity and an attack on the queenside to try to keep the pressure on despite feeling like resigning.


Pretty nice. His opening the c file was not the smartest decision in the world lol. Yeah I think the thing about Nd5 is any response except O-O-O justifies it, but after O-O-O you don't really want your knight taken so you're pretty much obliged to take yourself and the doubled pawns aren't really an issue (in fact black might like the g file).

Speaking of attacking vs defending, I played a 30|0 game just after waking up this morning. As might be expected, I blunder a pawn (one won in a gambit anyway, but still) and am stuck in probably the worse side of an IQP position, but tactics save the day. He is better up until the very last move (only like -0.2 here though, despite being up a pawn) he makes when he blunders mate in 3.. https://www.chess.com/live/game/1718580509
(well actually, not better up until that point, but at that point)
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by 1 8 13 20 42
Pretty nice. His opening the c file was not the smartest decision in the world lol. Yeah I think the thing about Nd5 is any response except O-O-O justifies it, but after O-O-O you don't really want your knight taken so you're pretty much obliged to take yourself and the doubled pawns aren't really an issue (in fact black might like the g file).

Speaking of attacking vs defending, I played a 30|0 game just after waking up this morning. As might be expected, I blunder a pawn (one won in a gambit anyway, but still) and am stuck in probably the worse side of an IQP position, but tactics save the day. He is better up until the very last move (only like -0.2 here though, despite being up a pawn) he makes when he blunders mate in 3.. https://www.chess.com/live/game/1718580509
(well actually, not better up until that point, but at that point)


What you said in the first paragraph exactly sums up my thoughts about the move after the match lol. In the game I made sure that I considered possible replies and it looked like a good move, but I had forgotten to consider O-O-O and yeah taking isn't as good as it might look at first.

Yeah I looked at that game already (I like looking at other people's games lol) and it was interesting to see how you handled the Albin. Will probably analyse it as well since it'll help in the event that I have to play against that opening.
And yeah it looked pretty even until he made a very silly blunder - too eager to trade queens.
Original post by IrrationalRoot
What you said in the first paragraph exactly sums up my thoughts about the move after the match lol. In the game I made sure that I considered possible replies and it looked like a good move, but I had forgotten to consider O-O-O and yeah taking isn't as good as it might look at first.

Yeah I looked at that game already (I like looking at other people's games lol) and it was interesting to see how you handled the Albin. Will probably analyse it as well since it'll help in the event that I have to play against that opening.
And yeah it looked pretty even until he made a very silly blunder - too eager to trade queens.


I guess O-O-O is often not on the radar, especially in systems where it's not that common.

I think it's a pretty poor opening for black. Had I not blundered a pawn for no reason, and just taken out his attacking knight, I would have been significantly better I think. Apparently after c5 instead of Qg3+ I was up like 1.8 - I don't really understand the vast differences there lol.
Original post by 1 8 13 20 42
Pretty nice. His opening the c file was not the smartest decision in the world lol. Yeah I think the thing about Nd5 is any response except O-O-O justifies it, but after O-O-O you don't really want your knight taken so you're pretty much obliged to take yourself and the doubled pawns aren't really an issue (in fact black might like the g file).

Speaking of attacking vs defending, I played a 30|0 game just after waking up this morning. As might be expected, I blunder a pawn (one won in a gambit anyway, but still) and am stuck in probably the worse side of an IQP position, but tactics save the day. He is better up until the very last move (only like -0.2 here though, despite being up a pawn) he makes when he blunders mate in 3.. https://www.chess.com/live/game/1718580509
(well actually, not better up until that point, but at that point)


Lol I was analysing while typing that last message and nice to see you playing perfectly for the first 10 moves. Unfortunately missing Bxg6 means that you lose the whole advantage and after that it's roughly equal for a long time.

Towards the end though there were quite a few cute tactics available that could've won you the game, mainly exploiting mate threats (such as c5) but most notable was Bc7 (following Nd7) which had a nice fork idea in response to Rc8.
Original post by IrrationalRoot
Lol I was analysing while typing that last message and nice to see you playing perfectly for the first 10 moves. Unfortunately missing Bxg6 means that you lose the whole advantage and after that it's roughly equal for a long time.

Towards the end though there were quite a few cute tactics available that could've won you the game, mainly exploiting mate threats (such as c5) but most notable was Bc7 (following Nd7) which had a nice fork idea in response to Rc8.


Yeah I looked at Bc7 from the computer. Pretty fun stuff. I think it was still better for a bit after Nxf6.
Just lost two blitz games on time because I forgot about them lol. Oops.
Original post by 1 8 13 20 42
Yeah I looked at Bc7 from the computer. Pretty fun stuff. I think it was still better for a bit after Nxf6.
Just lost two blitz games on time because I forgot about them lol. Oops.


Lol, I might start playing some blitz just for the bantz. Don't know whether I'm brave enough to play rated games though...
Original post by IrrationalRoot
Lol, I might start playing some blitz just for the bantz. Don't know whether I'm brave enough to play rated games though...


Well your blitz rating doesn't really say that much about your chess ability. I mean, great chess players are invariably great blitz players, but I think at lower levels, when there is less experience and not the same instant understanding of a wide array of positions and tactical motifs that facilitates fast play, being poor at blitz can be forgiven. So I try not to worry too much about my blitz rating (and, indeed, overall percentile) being inferior to my others. And bullet ratings, lol, doesn't matter at all.
Original post by 1 8 13 20 42
Well your blitz rating doesn't really say that much about your chess ability. I mean, great chess players are invariably great blitz players, but I think at lower levels, when there is less experience and not the same instant understanding of a wide array of positions and tactical motifs that facilitates fast play, being poor at blitz can be forgiven. So I try not to worry too much about my blitz rating (and, indeed, overall percentile) being inferior to my others. And bullet ratings, lol, doesn't matter at all.


I guess you're right, but I still don't wanna put any pressure on my blitz; I'll start of casually and if I like it I'll stick a rating on it.
And yeah bullet is a load of nonsense lol; it's all flagging, flagging, flagging XD. Still fun though :smile:.
Original post by 1 8 13 20 42
Well your blitz rating doesn't really say that much about your chess ability. I mean, great chess players are invariably great blitz players, but I think at lower levels, when there is less experience and not the same instant understanding of a wide array of positions and tactical motifs that facilitates fast play, being poor at blitz can be forgiven. So I try not to worry too much about my blitz rating (and, indeed, overall percentile) being inferior to my others. And bullet ratings, lol, doesn't matter at all.


First time playing such quick chess: is this what blitz chess is supposed to be like? XD this is hilarious: https://www.chess.com/live/game/1718746398

To top it all off, he offered me a rematch, I declined and then he says 'u scared' and leaves. Most entertaining opponent I've ever faced lol.
Original post by IrrationalRoot
First time playing such quick chess: is this what blitz chess is supposed to be like? XD this is hilarious: https://www.chess.com/live/game/1718746398

To top it all off, he offered me a rematch, I declined and then he says 'u scared' and leaves. Most entertaining opponent I've ever faced lol.


You do get more trash talk in blitz...haven't had it in a while.
Just played another game where I somehow blundered away a win in a rook and pawn endgame up pawns (really need to work on my rook and pawn endings). It got to all the pawns being off and then my opponent refused a draw and played on for like thirty moves, even though he had like 8 seconds left (with 2 second increment). He kept trying to skewer my king and rook, what a douche..
Original post by 1 8 13 20 42
You do get more trash talk in blitz...haven't had it in a while.
Just played another game where I somehow blundered away a win in a rook and pawn endgame up pawns (really need to work on my rook and pawn endings). It got to all the pawns being off and then my opponent refused a draw and played on for like thirty moves, even though he had like 8 seconds left (with 2 second increment). He kept trying to skewer my king and rook, what a douche..


Well I'm not playing blitz online again for a long time. I just lost to a 248. Yes, you read that right: https://www.chess.com/live/game/1718785374.
This is beyond pathetic.

Quick Reply