Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old March 18th 04, 01:54 PM
Mark A. Morenz
 
Posts: n/a
Default Rate My Game

Hi All:

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

He did say that I have a 1600-level understanding of strategy (I have
played a long, long time after all), but that my game was limited by
tactical errors. I can definitely see that-- but there are errors and
then there are *Errors*. I am interested in feedback that separates
the stylistic from the serious.

Here is a recent game (I won with Black). I appreciate any comments
that anyone might have.

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!!
  #2   Report Post  
Old March 18th 04, 03:54 PM
 
Posts: n/a
Default Rate My Game

hello,

Mark A. Morenz wrote:

He did say that I have a 1600-level understanding of strategy (I have
played a long, long time after all), but that my game was limited by
tactical errors.


Some free advise i got when playing on ICC from a 2000 player:
- dont play to fast games (at least 2/8)
- try to identify 'critical moments' in the game
(develop intuition when tactics are needed) and
then take more time
- analyze lost games for such moments and what mistake you made
- do some practice on tactics if you like it; there
are several tools to improve ( like CA total chess training,
or Polgar training in 5333 positions; but its really depending
on your own personality which puzzles you like or not;
not everybody likes systematic training..).

Good luck


  #4   Report Post  
Old March 18th 04, 07:42 PM
Mike Ogush
 
Posts: n/a
Default Rate My Game

On 18 Mar 2004 05:54:53 -0800, (Mark A. Morenz)
wrote:

Hi All:

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

He did say that I have a 1600-level understanding of strategy (I have
played a long, long time after all), but that my game was limited by
tactical errors. I can definitely see that-- but there are errors and
then there are *Errors*. I am interested in feedback that separates
the stylistic from the serious.

Here is a recent game (I won with Black). I appreciate any comments
that anyone might have.


Hello Mark,



1. e2-e4 g8-f6
2. b1-c3


This move renews a threat of 3.e5 when Black can no longer play
3...Nd5 since the Nc3 attacks the d5-square. So you need to either
negate the threat with 2...e5 which transposes to the Vienna Opening
or make a counter threat of your own with 2...d5, which is more in
keeping with the Spirit of the Alekhine Defense. After 2...d5 3.e5 is
met with 3...d4 and if White takes the knight exf6 then Black responds
in kind with dxc3. I don't play this line myself but I belive Black
comes out OK.

g7-g6


This allows 3.e5, which White shhould have played. Black would be
forced to respond with 3...Ng8 losing valuable tempi & White would
probabably continue developing with either d4 or Bc4) or 3...Nh5 to
keep the knight moving forward, but the this knight is not very useful
on the edge of the board.

3. d2-d4


Renewing the threat of e5. Now after e5 Black's only response is to
move backwards with ...Ng8 since after 4...Nh5 5.g4 wins the knight

f8-g7
4. c1-g5 d7-d6
5. f1-e2


Because White did not play e5 we have now transposed into a Pirc with
Bg5. One of White's main plans is to play Qd2 and Bh6 to trade of the
fianchetto's bishop afterwhich Black's kingside is weak and subject to
attack.
o-o


A more active plan is to play ...h6 first

6. g1-f3 c7-c6
7. o-o d6-d5


It is not generally a good idea to allow White to play e5 in the Pirc.
Forutnately for Black white did not know how to follow up.

8. e4-e5 f6-e8


Perhaps a little better is 8...Ne4 since 9.Nxe4 dxe4 10.Ne1 is only
slightly better for White.

9. b2-b4


This move and the subsequent Rab1 and b5 are not really in keeping
with the position. Much better is 9.Bf4 making it more difficult for
Black to dislodge the pawn at e5. After 9.Bf4 f6 10.Re1 Bg4 11.Qd2
White can keep the pawn at e5 or force Black to give up other
concessions (e.g. a bishop for a knight via 11...Bxf3) in order to
remove it.

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


Over the last few moves White has played somewhat aimlessly and lost a
pawn. (Better was 13.Bg3 or 16.Re1, 17.Bc1. Either approach would
have kept Black from winning the pawn for nothing.

d4xe2+
19. d1xe2 f4xg3
20. e2-e6+ g8-h8
21. f2xg3


Here Black might have noticed that if he moves the knight at d7 there
is discovered attack on the queen and found 21...Ne5! which also
protects the pawn at c6. White is forced to keep up his quuen for a
bishop and knight: 22.Qxe5 Bxe5 23.Nxe5 Rxf1+ 24.Rxf1 (24.Kxf1 Qf6+
25.Bf4 g5 loses more material) Qb6+ followed by either 25...Bh3 or
...Bf5 gives Black a winning advantage.

c8-a6
22. f1-e1


If Black had asked himself what has been left undefended He should
have noticed that 22...Rxf3 just wins a piece.

d5-d4
23. f3xd4 g7xd4+
24. g1-h1


Here Black can improve his piece placement by gaining tempi attacking
the White queen: 24...Nc5 25.Qg4 (Taking the pawn opens the diagonal
on White's king is too dangerous: 25.Qxc6 Rb8 26.Rxb8 Qxb8 27.Rb1 Bb7!
28.Rxb7 Qxb7 29.Qxb7 Nxb7 and Black is up a rook) 25...Bc8 26.Qe2 Bh3
creating dangerous threats on the h1-a8 diagonal. After 27.Ne4 Qd5
28.c4 Qxe4+ 29.Qxe4 Nxe4 30.Rxe4 Bf5 wins the exchange.

f8-f6
25. e6-e4 c6-c5


25...Nc5 might be better, but I like c5 opening up the diagonal on
White's king.
26. c3-d5 d4-f2


26...Bf2 is a mistake that could have cost you all of your advantage.
Better was just retreating the rook, 26...Rf8 before it got pinned.
Also until Black's king is safer, it is not a good idea to leave the
a1-h8 diagonal.

27. d2-c3 f2xe1


Here White should have just played 18.Qxe1 and Black will be unable to
save the rook. e.g. 18...Bc4 19.Nxf6 Nxf6 20.Rd1 Bd5+ 21.Kg2 and
22.Qe5

28. c3xf6+ d7xf6
29. d5xf6


Here Black has only two pieces that are attacked, the Bishop at e1 and
the rook at a8 (currently defended by the queen on the back rank), so
Black's best course would have been to just move the bishop 29...Bc3
to prevent White from occupying the a1-h8 diagonal himself and using a
discovered check when the Nf6 moves.

d8xf6


Instead Black left the Ra8 undefended and even worse White captures it
with check and then has time to capture the bishop at e1 as well.

30. e4xa8+ h8-g7


Here if white had played 31.Rxe1 followed by Qe4 he would have had a
strong advantage.
31. a8xa7+ g7-h6
32. b1xe1 f6-c6+


Black had a much better check with 32....Qf3+ 33.Kg1 Bb7 when Whites
only remaining chance is 34.Re2 Qxe2 35.Qxb7 Qd1+ 36.Kg2 Qxc2+ and
37...Qxa4 Black is pawn up in a queen ending and should win, but it
will be a challenge since Black will have to be on the alert for
White's drawing chances due to perpetual check with the queen.

By checking at c6 Black gave additional drawing chance to White:
33.Kg1 Bb7 34.Re2 Qh1+ 35.Kf2 Qxh2+ 36.Ke3 Qxg3+ 37.Kd2. Black has
won two pawns and now material is approximately equal. aside from a
horrible blunder on White's part Balck's only way to win is to promote
one of those passed king-side pawns. It will be very risky to for
Black to try to win this way since once Black stops checking he will
give White time to coordinate his queen and rook for both defense and
attack. Black could even lose, so the best course would be to
perpetual check and call the game a draw.

33. h1-g1 a6-b7
34. a7xb7 c6xb7


After this Black is clearly winning although White does make it easier
along the way. I won't comment further other than to say Black could
have won more quickly with 49...Qd2, 50...Kh4, Kg3 and Q mates next at
either f2 or g2 depending on which square White's king is on.

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!!


Some general advice:

After each move by your opponent ask yourself:
"What is he now threatening that he wasn't before?"
"What threats of mine did his move not respond to?"
"Did he leave anything undefended or enable any new threats of
mine?"

When you are contempating a possible next move for you ask yourself:
"What am I leaving undedended?"
"Have I responded to all of my opponents threats?"
"What do I threaten?"
"How can my opponent respond to that threat?"

If you ask these questions you should start to notice when you are
about to hang a piece or when your opponent has just hung one - things
that you overlooked several times during the above game.

In order to improve your tactics, look at the book "Chess Tactics for
Students" by John Bain. The positions focus on elementary tactical
themes (fork, pin skewer, discovered attack and so on). Once you have
gone through the book make flash cards out the positions(without any
of bain's hints) and drill yourself until you can recognize the best
move for the position almost instantly.

Hope this helps.

Mike Ogush
  #5   Report Post  
Old March 20th 04, 02:47 AM
Ron
 
Posts: n/a
Default Rate My Game

In article ,
(Mark A. Morenz) wrote:

Hi All:

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

He did say that I have a 1600-level understanding of strategy (I have
played a long, long time after all), but that my game was limited by
tactical errors. I can definitely see that-- but there are errors and
then there are *Errors*. I am interested in feedback that separates
the stylistic from the serious.


Well, I think that given how low your level is, you really need to buy
some good tactics books and work through them. If you've been playing
for 32 years and are at that level, I'd say, "okay, let's rebuild from
the beginning."

I'm talking about books like Chernev and Reinfeld's "Winning Chess: How
To See Three Moves Ahead" (out of print but very good and not too hard
to find) Chandler's "How to Beat Your Dad At Chess" (I think he has a
secnod, similarly formatted book now which I haven't read, but How To
Beat..." is fantastic.) Renaud and Kahn's "The Art of Checkmate."

This is all about starting from the smallest building blocks of tactics
and building up into something bigger.

I'll take a look at the game later (although I don't know if I'll be
able to add much to Mike's commentary). Those books won't teach you the
discipline to really look before you move (the source of many, many
tactical errors) but they will teach you the building blocks of tactics
and pay large dividends to your play.


  #6   Report Post  
Old March 20th 04, 05:43 AM
Benjamin Jordan
 
Posts: n/a
Default Rate My Game

It seems to me that at your (and my) level, games are won and lost by
tactical combinations, not strategy. Since that is the strength of computer
engines, I will usually auto-annotate my games with Fritz or Crafty. Those
engines really only need a few seconds per move to see my novice errors, so
the annotation does not take long. After annotation, I take a good look at
the key errors and try to learn from them.

I had Crafty look at your game with a 1-pawn margin for 5 sec per halfmove
and it found several significant oversights. An interesting one is at move
21, where you played Ba6. Crafty found:

21. ... Rxf3! If white recaptures with 22. Rxf3, Ne5! discovers an attack
on the queen, who then has nowhere to run. Cool.

Also, white traded his queen for a bishop to stop mate, when he could have
stayed in the game by protecting g2 with the rook.

Another type of thing it will show you is missed mating opportunites.
Instead of promoting and mating with two queens, you had a mate in 4 by
simply trapping the king with 49. ... Qd2 and getting your king into it.

Crafty will do nice annotations in HTML with diagrams for the key positions,
so you might want to take advantage of that.:

1. Paste the yahoo moves into winboard
2. Save the game as mygame.pgn in your ./Crafty directory.
3. Start Crafty and use the "annotateh" command. To see the diagrams, you
need the gifs available on the Crafty ftp site in ./Crafty/bitmaps/

- Ben

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark A. Morenz"
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess.misc
Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2004 5:49 AM
Subject: Rate My Game?


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

He did say that I have a 1600-level understanding of strategy (I have
played a long, long time after all), but that my game was limited by
tactical errors. I can definitely see that-- but there are errors and
then there are *Errors*. I am interested in feedback that separates
the stylistic from the serious.

Here is a recent game (I won with Black). I appreciate any comments
that anyone might have.

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!!



  #7   Report Post  
Old March 21st 04, 03:48 PM
Mark S. Hathaway
 
Posts: n/a
Default Rate My Game

Mark A. Morenz wrote:
Hi All:

I've been playing for since I was three (32 years). I am a weak club
player (OTB 900, Yahoo 1400, etc).


There's no good reason for someone to languish at that level
for 32 years.

Let's see what can be done about that.

I once paid a 2000-level player to
analyze my games; and, while that was useful, it was less so than I
had hoped. He basically saw every other move that either I or my
opponent made as an error.


Did he give any advice on what to do to improve?

He did say that I have a 1600-level understanding of strategy (I have
played a long, long time after all), but that my game was limited by
tactical errors. I can definitely see that-- but there are errors and
then there are *Errors*.


True, but you've got to limit the 'errors' before the 'Errors'
become so relevant. :-)

I am interested in feedback that separates the stylistic from the serious.


Here is a recent game (I won with Black). I appreciate any comments
that anyone might have.


First, you need to give us regular PGN notation, so I can
read it without so much work.

1. e2-e4 g8-f6
2. b1-c3 g7-g6

( 2...d6 )
( 2...d5 )
{ Black must control the center to some extent, so as to
develop pieces without being overrun. }

3. d2-d4


( 3. e5 )

3...f8-g7


( 3...d6 )

4. c1-g5 d7-d6
5. f1-e2 o-o
6. g1-f3 c7-c6
7. o-o d6-d5


{ There's no need to move that pawn again when there's
not threat and you still need to develop some other
pieces.

Don't be so anxious to get to the hand-to-hand combat.
Spend a little time on marshalling your forces, so you'll
have a superiority of force when the raging battle begins. }

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+


{ Another case of racing into battle or of just
thinking the bishop is better than the knight? }

19. d1xe2 f4xg3
20. e2-e6+ g8-h8
21. f2xg3 c8-a6


{ The mention, someone else gave, to ...Ne5 is
nifty, but not so obvious. I don't fault anyone
for not seeing that. }

22. f1-e1 d5-d4


( 22...Rxf3 -+ )

{ Free pieces, all other factors being relatively equal,
should be taken. Isn't that a big part of how we all
win games -- grab free material, including the opponent's
king? }

23. f3xd4 g7xd4+
24. g1-h1 f8-f6
25. e6-e4 c6-c5
26. c3-d5 d4-f2


{ The Black rook is probably better on the 7th rank.
Temporarily "hitting" Re1 isn't of much long-term
consequence. }

27. d2-c3 f2xe1
28. c3xf6+ d7xf6
29. d5xf6 d8xf6


{ Saving Be1 is probably sufficient to win.
I'm assuming you simply didn't see that Qd8xf6
lost Ra8. This is the kind of simple tactics the
expert was probably talking about. And, YES, these
things do cost games, despite the fact you were
winning. }

30. e4xa8+ h8-g7
31. a8xa7+ g7-h6
32. b1xe1 f6-c6+
33. h1-g1 a6-b7
34. a7xb7 c6xb7


It should be a pretty easy mop up after this, so
I'm not going to go any further.

You did play a reasonably good game, but there's clearly
room for improvement in 'seeing' tactics and in finding
ways to move your pieces in concert to get things done.
Moving one piece to a good square is good, but finding
ways for all (or most) of your pieces to achieve something
together is needed too. Seeing more stuff to avoid tactical
oversights (like not winning a hanging piece or hanging
one of your own) has to be focused on -- that's a huge
factor in all games for all players!

So, there's three suggestions:

1. See more to avoid tactical oversights
2. Make all your pieces work together in some effort
3. Don't rush into battle until you have your pieces active.

To improve these things you need to narrow down your
practice effort to focusing on one very small thing
at a time and working on that exclusively for some time
(could be months). Then, when you're ready (and you'll
know when that is), you move on to another small thing.
In time, perhaps a year or three, you'll see huge improvements
in your play and your rating.

Thanks!!

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



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:09 AM.

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