Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old July 28th 04, 05:51 AM
Glenn 'Mac' Frazier
 
Posts: n/a
Default Comment please on another Tarrasch

Hi,

Anyone willing to provide feedback on a game I just lost? It came down
(as always) to tactics and (mis)calculation. I suppose what I'm
looking for most is some advice along the lines of the psychology of
my blunders. General advice is welcome too.

Thanks!


[Event "Practice Game 90 s/move avg"]
[Site "Abington PA USA"]
[Date "2004.07.27"]
[Round "8"]
[White "Sigma 6.0.3"]
[Black "Frazier, Glenn M"]
[Result "1-0"]
[WhiteElo "1400"]
[BlackElo "1166"]
[ECO "D34"]
[Opening "Queen's G-D, Tarrasch, Prague V, 9.Bg5"]

1. d4 d5 2. Nf3 e6 3. c4 c5 4. cxd5 exd5 5. Nc3 Nc6 6. g3 Nf6
7. Bg2 Be7 8. O-O O-O 9. Bg5 cxd4 10. Nxd4 h6 11. Be3 Re8
12. Rc1 Bg4 13. h3 Bh5 14. Bf4 Bc5 15. Nxc6 bxc6 16. Qb3 Qb6
17. Qc2 Rac8 18. Na4 Rxe2 19. Nxb6 Rxc2 20. Nxc8 Rxc1
21. Rxc1 Nd7 22. b4 Bxb4 23. Rxc6 d4 24. Nxa7 d3 25. Rc8+ Nf8
26. Nc6 g6 27. Nxb4 1-0


My own annotations follow.

White: Sigma 6.0.3 (1400)
Black: Frazier,Glenn M (1166)
Event: Practice Game 90 s/move avg, Abington PA USA (8)
Date: 2004-07-27
(D34 Queen's G-D, Tarrasch, Prague V, 9.Bg5)

1 d4 d5
2 Nf3 e6
3 c4 c5
4 cxd5 exd5
5 Nc3 Nc6
6 g3 Nf6
7 Bg2 Be7
8 0-0 0-0
9 Bg5 cxd4
10 Nxd4 h6
11 Be3 Re8
12 Rc1 Bg4

12 ... Bf8 looks good.
13 a3
(13 Na4 Ng4 14 Nxc6 bxc6;
13 Nxc6 bxc6 14 Na4;
13 Ncb5 Bd7 14 Nxc6 bxc6 15 Nd4 c5 16 Nb3 c4 17 Nd2 Rxe3 18 fxe3 Bc5
19 Kh1 Be6;
13 Re1 Bg4; 13 Qb3 Na5 14 Qc2 Bg4 15 h3 Bh5 16 b3 Ba3 17 Rcd1 Bg6 18
Qd2 Bb4 19 Qb2 Rc8 20 Ndb5 Rxe3)
13 ... Bg4 14 Re1 Qd7 15 Nxc6 bxc6 16 Na4 Bh3

13 h3 Bh5

13 ... Be6 takes the pressure off of e2, but otherwise seems more
natural here. 14 Kh2 (14 Nxc6 bxc6 15 Na4 Qa5) 14 ... Qd7

14 Bf4

14 Nf5 was played in Norwood,D (2485) - Mack,A (2295), BCF-ch 1989,
which continued 14 ... Qd7 15 Nxe7+ Nxe7 16 Bd4 Ne4 17 Bxg7 Kxg7 18
Nxe4 Qe6 19 Qd4+ f6 20 Nc5 Qb6 21 e4 dxe4 22 Qxe4 Nc6 23 Ne6+ Kf7 24
Qd5 Rxe6 25 Qxh5+ White won.

14 ... Bc5
15 Nxc6 bxc6
16 Qb3 Qb6
17 Qc2

At this point, I became temporarily overwhelmed by the complications
on the c-file and on the e2 and f2 squares. I thought at this point
that perhaps I had erred when playing the bishop to c5 a few moves
ago. My tired old brain miscalculated the series of exchanges that are
about to ensue, all the while missing an easy solution.

17 ... Rac8??

How many moves is an U1200 patzer like me expected to make without a
blunder? Well, I think I've played rather well for 16 moves, but, as
often happens, somewhere in the transition from opening to middlegame
I lose the thread.

17 ... Bg6 Somehow, I was totally blind to this solution. 18 Qd1 Be7
19 Qd2 Rad8 20 a3 Qb3 21 Rfd1 Bf5 Would have been wonderfully
playable.

18 Na4 Rxe2?

Argh. I always do this. When I see I've blundered in a knotty
situation, my instinct always drives me to find an even more
convoluted, counterattacking response. In other words, when I drop a
piece, a switch goes off in my brain that says, "While we're dropping
pieces, lets drop another in some wild, harebrained lashing out of an
unsound combination, too!" Just accepting the loss of material and
digging in is a hard skill for me to learn because it is against my
nature in general.
18 ... Qb5 Just give the nice horsey your bishop and it won't eat your
queen and rook, okay? 19 Nxc5 Rxe2 20 Bd2 Bg6 21 Qc3 Rce8 22 Bf3 R2e5
Still has some fight left in it (at my level, at least) despite the
material deficit.

19 Nxb6 Rxc2
20 Nxc8 Rxc1
21 Rxc1

I don't remember exactly how I (mis)calculated it, but somehow back on
move 18 I envisioned having one of my rooks survive. Madness.

21 ... Nd7
22 b4 Bxb4
23 Rxc6 d4
24 Nxa7 d3
25 Rc8+ Nf8
26 Nc6 g6??

An absolute screaming howler of a blunder, considering how much time I
put into considering the position. I had calculated at least one line
in which the knight capturing on b4 was nothing to worry about, and I
guess the "don't worry" flag got left on in my brain when I switched
to calculating the next variation. Argh. I almost and correctly
played...
26 ... d2 27 Bxd2! (27 Ne7+? Bxe7 28 Bxd2) 27 ... Bxd2 28 Ne7+ Kh7 29
Rxf8 which would still be a losing game, but not nearly so severely.;
26 ... Ba3 27 Rd8 Be2 28 Be4 g5 29 Bxd3 Bf3 30 Nd4 Bd1 may even be
better, for whatever that's worth.

27 Nxb4 1-0

Besides pointing out tactics, thinking errors behind tactical
blunders, and general strategic advice, I would also love a critique
of how I annotate my games. Everyone says that one of the most useful
things to do in terms of improvement is to annotate your own games.

My approach is to first try to recapture any thoughts I had during the
game. This is most effective if the game just ended, but my results
are mixed, especially during a long tournament. Along the way, I begin
to make my own post-mortem assessments and explore some new lines.
Then, I recheck things against databases that include my own opening
book notes, my own games, and a good number of games from the last
century or two up to and including the latest TWIC. Any
interesting/relevant games I find, I play over. Then I send the whole
thing through Crafty for analysis, but I only pay attention to shifts
of a whole pawn or more, as I find at my level (U1200) the more
nuanced tactical lines Crafty comes up with when reporting at, for
instance, 50-centipawn gaps are not often of great use to me. My final
step is to try and find someone, at a club, at a tournament, via
email, or, now, here in usenet, that can give me a fresh, outside
perspective.

It's a lot of work, actually, but I don't go full bore on every game I
play, especially ones not being played for blood or money. I'm just
focusing on the ones that seem emblematic of my troubles or that
confused me during play, or that are particularly pleasing or
intriguing to me from an aesthetic or intellectual standpoint,
regardless of result.

What do you do?
  #2   Report Post  
Old August 6th 04, 12:13 AM
vindaloo_man[N_O_S_P_A_M]
 
Posts: n/a
Default Comment please on another Tarrasch

I am nothing special (just 1428 Italian ELO, 1500 FICS) but I have a bit
of experience playing the tarrasch too. I like that setup so I will try
to comment your match (beware, I am not a good player)

1. d4 d5 2. Nf3 e6 3. c4 c5 4. cxd5 exd5 5. Nc3 Nc6 6. g3 Nf6
7. Bg2 Be7 8. O-O O-O 9. Bg5 cxd4 10. Nxd4 h6 11. Be3

{Till here everything here. Now the white wants to help black blocking
the way of the e pawn.Bf4 was quite better IHMO}

Re8
12. Rc1 Bg4

{Good! That's where black q bishop must be placed. In the other match
you played Be6 and your Bishop was nothing more than a pawn }

13. h3 Bh5

{mmm this I don't like. I would have kept the B on the previous
diagonal, where it plays an active role. AFter all Bg4 has made the
white to weaken its castling so now your bishop could step back}

14. Bf4

{Now finally white bishop goes away from e3}

Bc5 15. Nxc6

{Not white better move. White is suppose to block the isolani pawn, not
to remove its blockers}

15...bxc6

16. Qb3 {Wasn't it supposed to be played before, when it could press
black pawns in d and b7?}

16...Qb6 17. Qc2 Rac8 {Argh ;-) ...Maybe it was not easy to be saw. But
from here on you start going panic?} 18. Na4 Rxe2 19. Nxb6 Rxc2 20. Nxc8
Rxc1
21. Rxc1 Nd7 22. b4 Bxb4 23. Rxc6 d4 24. Nxa7 d3 25. Rc8+ Nf8
26. Nc6 g6 27. Nxb4 1-0


Till before your first blunder you didn't play bad even if
White was not very sharp. What happened on 17?
Lack of calculation? A bit of relaxation to have reached a good position?
Try to check out the archives of the column "Novice Nook" on
chesscafe.com, expecially the articles about "Hope chess and real
chess". You (and me as a novice) never have to play a move just to see
what will happen.

I hope this little humble analysys help you someway even if maybe it was
not exactly what you where looking for
  #3   Report Post  
Old August 7th 04, 01:15 AM
My name is Mac, not Spam
 
Posts: n/a
Default Comment please on another Tarrasch

in article ,
vindaloo_man[N_O_S_P_A_M] at wrote
on 8/5/04 7:13 PM:

I am nothing special (just 1428 Italian ELO, 1500 FICS) but I have a bit
of experience playing the tarrasch too. I like that setup so I will try
to comment your match (beware, I am not a good player)


You're rated a fair bit higher than I am, and experience with the wonderful
Tarrasch is an additional qualification. All your input was good. Below I
only respond to some of it for now.

1. d4 d5 2. Nf3 e6 3. c4 c5 4. cxd5 exd5 5. Nc3 Nc6 6. g3 Nf6
7. Bg2 Be7 8. O-O O-O 9. Bg5 cxd4 10. Nxd4 h6 11. Be3


[snip]

13. h3 Bh5

{mmm this I don't like. I would have kept the B on the previous
diagonal, where it plays an active role. AFter all Bg4 has made the
white to weaken its castling so now your bishop could step back}


That makes sense. Pressure on the e-pawn (via this bishop and also via the
rook on e8) is thematic to some Tarrasch positions, but in this case e6 is
the better place to be.

14. Bf4


[snip]

16...Qb6 17. Qc2 Rac8 {Argh ;-) ...Maybe it was not easy to be saw. But
from here on you start going panic?} 18. Na4 Rxe2 19. Nxb6 Rxc2 20. Nxc8
Rxc1
21. Rxc1 Nd7 22. b4 Bxb4 23. Rxc6 d4 24. Nxa7 d3 25. Rc8+ Nf8
26. Nc6 g6 27. Nxb4 1-0


"Argh" indeed! My earlier explanation: "At this point, I became temporarily
overwhelmed by the complications on the c-file and on the e2 and f2 squares.
I thought at this point that perhaps I had erred when playing the bishop to
c5 a few moves ago. My tired old brain miscalculated the series of exchanges
that are about to ensue, all the while missing an easy solution."

Lately I've been playing chess at later and later hours, yet I have not been
getting up any later in the morning. My sleep is getting squeezed. My chess
suffers accordingly.

Somebody (IM Silman?) recommends regularly "resetting" your brain during a
chess game: get up, walk about, breathe, relax the mind, stop calculating
and planning. Then go back to the board with a fresh eye and less-tense
muscles. This position called for just that for me. Not only was I tired,
but I was mentally overreaching trying to calculate too-complicated
variations because of all the different pressures involved in this
particular position.

Till before your first blunder you didn't play bad even if
White was not very sharp. What happened on 17?
Lack of calculation? A bit of relaxation to have reached a good position?
Try to check out the archives of the column "Novice Nook" on
chesscafe.com, expecially the articles about "Hope chess and real
chess". You (and me as a novice) never have to play a move just to see
what will happen.


Thanks for that suggestion. I'll check it out tonight!

I hope this little humble analysys help you someway even if maybe it was
not exactly what you where looking for


I believe what I am looking for is "any help", and you have provided not
just "any" help, but also gracious and intelligent help. Thanks!


--
Glenn 'Mac' Frazier
USCF#12721233, FICS:'Frazier', RedHotPawn.com:'GMF'
mailto: [ my 3-letter name ] @thefraziers.org, http://mac.thefraziers.org/



Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Feedback on a Tarrasch, U1200 Mac rec.games.chess.analysis (Chess Analysis) 0 July 27th 04 07:05 AM
Comment on this game? Michael Dean rec.games.chess.analysis (Chess Analysis) 4 May 12th 04 01:33 PM
QGD: Tarrasch Defense - Marshall Gambit King Leopold rec.games.chess.analysis (Chess Analysis) 4 December 24th 03 12:23 AM
KBNvK Mate Made Easy by Tarrasch DDEckerslyke rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 10 November 16th 03 01:18 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:12 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Chess"

 

Copyright © 2017