Politics posters chess thread
Mods - I hope this is OK, if not, move to LC or something.
Seems we've got a few chess players here, and some threads end up getting derailed arranging chess games. Figured maybe we could have a thread for it. So far, lagtight and I have played quite a few games, forumula72 and luckbox have expressed a wish to play, and a few other posters have taken an interest in passing. Post here to set up a game! We have been playing on chess.com so far.
Well I guess it can gives ideas anyway for black so ->
If only white had the chance to have all the pawns on the same side for his knight the position would be less difficult .
Black here big +ev , probably winning .
Hopefully gorgo won’t choke !
Ps: putting pressure to your enemy d2-e4 😀
...Ke5
Spoiler
pawns on both sides of the board is an advantage with the bishop vs. knight in this endgame. Activating the king feels like the first step. Keeping pawns on light squares, fixing his pawns on light squares, and keeping king on dark squares to avoid forks seems like the basic idea. King in the center helps reduce the effectiveness of his q-side majority, too. I feel like e6 might be a move to throw in if I have the time to do it to keep pawns on light squares. This feels like a winning position, but endgames aren't my favorite thing. I can play them decently I think (hope! it's been a few years) but I never studied them as thoroughly as I should have.
kf1
... Kd4
ke2
Ok.. gonna think for a while now.
Ne3
Doesn't look great for black, if I'm honest.
...f4
Nc5+
Oops ty yes
...Kc4
h4
... Bc8
Yeah, I don't see a way out of this, I think that's all she wrote. Well played Gorg, gg!
Sure, please do. I was going to go to the analysis board on chess.com myself a bit later on and see where I went wrong. I was always on the back foot that game, seems like I always had one or very few moves to choose from to stave off impending disaster, and never had any threats of my own.
Sure, please do. I was going to go to the analysis board on chess.com myself a bit later on and see where I went wrong. I was always on the back foot that game, seems like I always had one or very few moves to choose from to stave off impending disaster, and never had any threats of my own.
You definitely didn't make any big mistakes. I suspect that analysis would just show that Gorg's positional play in the first 10-15 moves was a bit better than yours, which eventually translated into you losing a pawn. He seemed to me to manage his end game efficiently, but I am a chess dumb ass, so who knows.
I will be curious to see whether there was ever a point in the game after you went down a pawn where perfect play would have gotten you a draw.
I felt that Qc8 was a pretty serious positional mistake. It definitely felt like a place to get my hooks into the position for the first time there. Also the earlier c5 is pretty commital, positionally. I felt like it was played without knowing what it was committing to.
I would exchange the pawns.
You mean d5? Doesn't seem to do anything for my position other than weaken it, by opening a line for his queen to attack d4. Also, as a general rule, isolated pawns aren't great. If I exchange on d5 my d4 pawn is left all on its own in the centre of the board with no backup, sticking out like a foreskin at a Bar Mitzvah.
I went back and looked at the justification for c5, and I think this is an issue. Breaking in the center is about timing. You will usually want to maintain the option to do so in case it is ever beneficial. When your opponent has a grip on the center, it is usually necessary to challenge it, but like I said, timing. Playing cxd5 may not be right on that move, but that doesn't mean c5 is necessary. c5 is committal precisely because it removes option of challenging that pawn in middle. What it does give is space on the queenside, which I felt like was never really utilized. I wanted you to play b4 to at least try to maintain that idea, but once my b-pawn took c5 with no pawn to replace it, the only thing you got from c5 in exchange for that ability to challenge was gone.
This is my toddler level positional analysis, fyi. Don't take it as gospel, please. Just giving my thoughts. Some of you guys up in here giving me way more credit than I deserve.
Yeah I guess I was trying to just play an opening that wasn't book since I get hopelessly outplayed by someone who knows the book, but obviously there is a reason why there's a book 😃.
Broadly speaking, yes, I think c5 was a major mistake since I didn't really follow it up with anything meaningful and that whole structure just became a massive liability.
When I get around to putting the game into the engine on chess.com, I'll report back on the highlights of the analysis.
