Hi All:

I've been playing since I was 3 (32 years), but am still a weak club
player (900 OTB, 1400 Yahoo, etc). I once paid a 2000 player to
analyze my games; and, while that was useful, it was less so than I
hoped for. He basically saw every other move that either I or my
opponent made as an error.

He did say I seemed to have about a 1600-level understanding of
strategy (I have been playing a long, long time after all), but my
tactical errors limited my effectiveness. And I can definitely see
that-- but there are errors and there are *Errors*. I'm interested
getting more feedback in order to highlight the serious from the
stylistic.

If anyone cared to, here is a recent game (I won with Black) for
analysis. I appreciate all comments.

1. e2-e4 g8-f6
2. b1-c3 g7-g6
3. d2-d4 f8-g7
4. c1-g5 d7-d6
5. f1-e2 o-o
6. g1-f3 c7-c6
7. o-o d6-d5
8. e4-e5 f6-e8
9. b2-b4 f7-f6
10. e5xf6 e7xf6
11. g5-f4 e8-c7
12. a1-b1 c7-e6
13. f4-e3 b8-d7
14. b4-b5 f6-f5
15. b5xc6 b7xc6
16. a2-a4 f5-f4
17. e3-d2 e6xd4
18. g2-g3 d4xe2+
19. d1xe2 f4xg3
20. e2-e6+ g8-h8
21. f2xg3 c8-a6
22. f1-e1 d5-d4
23. f3xd4 g7xd4+
24. g1-h1 f8-f6
25. e6-e4 c6-c5
26. c3-d5 d4-f2
27. d2-c3 f2xe1
28. c3xf6+ d7xf6
29. d5xf6 d8xf6
30. e4xa8+ h8-g7
31. a8xa7+ g7-h6
32. b1xe1 f6-c6+
33. h1-g1 a6-b7
34. a7xb7 c6xb7
35. e1-a1 b7-b2
36. a1-f1 b2xc2
37. a4-a5 c2-a2
38. a5-a6 a2xa6
39. f1-c1 c5-c4
40. g3-g4 a6-a7+
41. g1-g2 a7-b7+
42. g2-g3 g6-g5
43. c1xc4 b7-b3+
44. g3-f2 b3xc4
45. h2-h3 c4-d4+
46. f2-e2 h6-g6
47. e2-e1 h7-h5
48. g4xh5+ g6xh5
49. e1-f1 d4-h4
50. f1-e2 h4xh3
51. e2-d2 h3-f3
52. d2-c2 g5-g4
53. c2-b2 g4-g3
54. b2-a2 g3-g2
55. a2-b2 g2-g1
56. b2-a2 g1-g2+
57. a2-a1 f3-f1++

Thanks!

:-{)]

"Mark A. Morenz" wrote in message
om...
Hi All:

I've been playing since I was 3 (32 years), but am still a weak club
player (900 OTB, 1400 Yahoo, etc). I once paid a 2000 player to
analyze my games; and, while that was useful, it was less so than I
hoped for. He basically saw every other move that either I or my
opponent made as an error.

He did say I seemed to have about a 1600-level understanding of
strategy (I have been playing a long, long time after all), but my
tactical errors limited my effectiveness. And I can definitely see
that-- but there are errors and there are *Errors*. I'm interested
getting more feedback in order to highlight the serious from the
stylistic.

If anyone cared to, here is a recent game (I won with Black) for
analysis. I appreciate all comments.

1. e2-e4 g8-f6
2. b1-c3 g7-g6
3. d2-d4 f8-g7
4. c1-g5 d7-d6
5. f1-e2 o-o
6. g1-f3 c7-c6
7. o-o d6-d5
8. e4-e5 f6-e8
9. b2-b4 f7-f6
10. e5xf6 e7xf6
11. g5-f4 e8-c7
12. a1-b1 c7-e6
13. f4-e3 b8-d7
14. b4-b5 f6-f5
15. b5xc6 b7xc6
16. a2-a4 f5-f4
17. e3-d2 e6xd4
18. g2-g3 d4xe2+
19. d1xe2 f4xg3
20. e2-e6+ g8-h8
21. f2xg3 c8-a6
22. f1-e1 d5-d4
23. f3xd4 g7xd4+
24. g1-h1 f8-f6
25. e6-e4 c6-c5
26. c3-d5 d4-f2
27. d2-c3 f2xe1
28. c3xf6+ d7xf6
29. d5xf6 d8xf6
30. e4xa8+ h8-g7
31. a8xa7+ g7-h6
32. b1xe1 f6-c6+
33. h1-g1 a6-b7
34. a7xb7 c6xb7
35. e1-a1 b7-b2
36. a1-f1 b2xc2
37. a4-a5 c2-a2
38. a5-a6 a2xa6
39. f1-c1 c5-c4
40. g3-g4 a6-a7+
41. g1-g2 a7-b7+
42. g2-g3 g6-g5
43. c1xc4 b7-b3+
44. g3-f2 b3xc4
45. h2-h3 c4-d4+
46. f2-e2 h6-g6
47. e2-e1 h7-h5
48. g4xh5+ g6xh5
49. e1-f1 d4-h4
50. f1-e2 h4xh3
51. e2-d2 h3-f3
52. d2-c2 g5-g4
53. c2-b2 g4-g3
54. b2-a2 g3-g2
55. a2-b2 g2-g1
56. b2-a2 g1-g2+
57. a2-a1 f3-f1++

Thanks!

Until you learn proper notation, my guess is you'll get little feedback from
anyone. Someone who's been playing 32 years should open a chess book now
and then.
--
Ian Burton
[Please Reply to Newsgroup]

That's the sort of unhelpfully misanthropic post that gives chess
players everywhere a bad name. I obviously cut and pasted the notation
from a yahoo games online session. Get a grip. I'm just asking for a
little friendly help...if you don't want to be helpful (or friendly)
then take a pass. No one gets hurt. jeeezus.

:-{)]

"ian burton" wrote in message news:dEj6c.8645$Bg.2559@fed1read03...
"Mark A. Morenz" wrote in message
om...
Hi All:

I've been playing since I was 3 (32 years), but am still a weak club
player (900 OTB, 1400 Yahoo, etc). I once paid a 2000 player to
analyze my games; and, while that was useful, it was less so than I
hoped for. He basically saw every other move that either I or my
opponent made as an error.

He did say I seemed to have about a 1600-level understanding of
strategy (I have been playing a long, long time after all), but my
tactical errors limited my effectiveness. And I can definitely see
that-- but there are errors and there are *Errors*. I'm interested
getting more feedback in order to highlight the serious from the
stylistic.

If anyone cared to, here is a recent game (I won with Black) for
analysis. I appreciate all comments.

1. e2-e4 g8-f6
2. b1-c3 g7-g6
3. d2-d4 f8-g7
4. c1-g5 d7-d6
5. f1-e2 o-o
6. g1-f3 c7-c6
7. o-o d6-d5
8. e4-e5 f6-e8
9. b2-b4 f7-f6
10. e5xf6 e7xf6
11. g5-f4 e8-c7
12. a1-b1 c7-e6
13. f4-e3 b8-d7
14. b4-b5 f6-f5
15. b5xc6 b7xc6
16. a2-a4 f5-f4
17. e3-d2 e6xd4
18. g2-g3 d4xe2+
19. d1xe2 f4xg3
20. e2-e6+ g8-h8
21. f2xg3 c8-a6
22. f1-e1 d5-d4
23. f3xd4 g7xd4+
24. g1-h1 f8-f6
25. e6-e4 c6-c5
26. c3-d5 d4-f2
27. d2-c3 f2xe1
28. c3xf6+ d7xf6
29. d5xf6 d8xf6
30. e4xa8+ h8-g7
31. a8xa7+ g7-h6
32. b1xe1 f6-c6+
33. h1-g1 a6-b7
34. a7xb7 c6xb7
35. e1-a1 b7-b2
36. a1-f1 b2xc2
37. a4-a5 c2-a2
38. a5-a6 a2xa6
39. f1-c1 c5-c4
40. g3-g4 a6-a7+
41. g1-g2 a7-b7+
42. g2-g3 g6-g5
43. c1xc4 b7-b3+
44. g3-f2 b3xc4
45. h2-h3 c4-d4+
46. f2-e2 h6-g6
47. e2-e1 h7-h5
48. g4xh5+ g6xh5
49. e1-f1 d4-h4
50. f1-e2 h4xh3
51. e2-d2 h3-f3
52. d2-c2 g5-g4
53. c2-b2 g4-g3
54. b2-a2 g3-g2
55. a2-b2 g2-g1
56. b2-a2 g1-g2+
57. a2-a1 f3-f1++

Thanks!

Until you learn proper notation, my guess is you'll get little feedback from
anyone. Someone who's been playing 32 years should open a chess book now
and then.

Blimey Ian, dont have a go at the chap, he's only asking for a little
help and probably spent quite a while typing those moves in the
computer, I am nowhere near an expert but i will play thru the game
and give you any comments i may have on your play

Jonny

Log onto www.letsplaychess.com and challenge jonnywildboar - fun 4 all

Until you learn proper notation, my guess is you'll get little feedback from
anyone.

This isn't improper notation. I think it is long algebraic. I don't use it
myself but it is an option on many chess programs.

asked
If anyone cared to, here is a recent game (I won with Black) for
analysis. I appreciate all comments.


I won't comment on the entire game but the opening is worth a look.

Neither player kept in mind the importance of the center, development,
equalizing, and retaining the inititive. Consequently, game was back and forth
as to advantage.
1. e4 Nc6

Black entered Alekhine's Defense if White chose to go that route. White made a
passive reply.
2. Nc3 which developed a piece and protected his pawn on e4. Usually White
would have played 2. e5 attacking Black's knight forcing it to move.

White's passive play gives Black a chance to equalize if not take the inititive
as early as the second move.

2. Nc3 e5

Instead Black played 2. ... g6 intending to fianchetto his Bishop as early as
possible.
This intention to fianchetto was ill advised and pasive as there was no need to
do so as normal development of the bishop after 2. ... e5 would have been
possible and much stronger and aggressive play. The bishop on g7 may control
the long diagonal but it does not attack White's center pawn on e4. Nor does it
really prevent the advance of the e4 pawn to e5 as placeing a pawn on e5 would
have done.

Possibly Black was preparing to advance his queen pawn to d5 with support from
the bishop, but Black reached d5 in two moves which also wasted a tempo.

By move six Black was out developed though he did castle early. Black's
salvation was that White persisted in playing on the Queen side especially on
the b file. Black was able to gain time by attacks on White's Queen's Bishop
with subsequent gains in position and tempo.

In his retreat, on move 13 White should have kept his bishop on the b8-h2
diagonal . He had time to make further room and gain space by moving h2-h3 and
begining active play on the king side instead of further retreats.

I hope that this helps. As White, I would have tested Black's knowledge of
Alekhine's Defense by staying in the book and striking at the knight on f6.

As Black, I would have played for the inititive after White's weak and passive
second move.

1. e4 Nf6
2. Nc3 e5

"PJDBAD" wrote in message
...

Until you learn proper notation, my guess is you'll get little feedback
from
anyone.

This isn't improper notation. I think it is long algebraic. I don't use it
myself but it is an option on many chess programs.

It's not long algebraic. The pieces are named in long algebraic, not just
the squares.
--
Ian Burton
[Please Reply to Newsgroup]

I regret being taken the wrong way. I meant my comment to be helpful.
--
Ian Burton
[Please Reply to Newsgroup]

"jonnywildboar" wrote in message
om...
Blimey Ian, dont have a go at the chap, he's only asking for a little
help and probably spent quite a while typing those moves in the
computer, I am nowhere near an expert but i will play thru the game
and give you any comments i may have on your play

Jonny

Log onto www.letsplaychess.com and challenge jonnywildboar - fun 4 all

Mark A. Morenz wrote in message
. ..
Hi All:

If anyone cared to, here is a recent game (I won with Black) for
analysis. I appreciate all comments.


After a quick skim through (so the following may not be accurate, but may
give you a few thoughts):
21. ... Nd7-e5 looks pretty devastating for you; did you overlook it? If so,
why? The B-N-Q line up is the sort of thing you should be looking for.

Allowing White's attack at around move 27 was horribly risky, but if you
play 29. ... Be1-c3 you should get through it. As it was, you got lucky when
he played 34 Qa7xb7. (Did you mean 32. ... Qf6-f3+, rather than Qf6-c6+ ?
Then white's queen sacrifice makes a bit more sense).

(Mark A. Morenz) wrote in message . com...
Hi All:


A few things. Analyze your losses instead of your wins, posting your
win for analysis is arrogant, and everyone learns more from their
losses than from their wins. You do not have a 1600 positional
understanding, your play could easily be mistaken for that of an
elementary school student. You attack your 2000 rated coach for
attacking your moves, the 2000 coach had plenty to teach you, instead
of seeking praise anonymously on rgcm you should get a thicker skin,
go back to the 2000, and listen closely to what that person was trying
to tell you. Oh, and the original responder was correct, the notation
you posted is annoying and typical of an uncultured fish.

If you think about it, there is a lot of good advice for you in my
post.