LMatheson's Chess Journal - Page 9 - OzChess

**LMatheson** · 09-27-2009, 05:02 PM

This is it!

**LMatheson** · 09-28-2009, 03:28 PM

Hey guys!

I dug deep into my chessbase database of games and found a whole tournament that I hadn't posted from early 2008. It was one of my best from that time, and was what I would classify as a "breakthrough" tournament for me.

**Jaydon** · 09-28-2009, 03:52 PM

Originally Posted by LMatheson

Hey guys!

I dug deep into my chessbase database of games and found a whole tournament that I hadn't posted from early 2008. It was one of my best from that time, and was what I would classify as a "breakthrough" tournament for me.

I thought I'd seen that first game before! The second one you ever posted. How did you go in this tournament by the way?

**LMatheson** · 09-28-2009, 06:12 PM

Originally Posted by Jaydon

I thought I'd seen that first game before! The second one you ever posted. How did you go in this tournament by the way?

I came equal 4th: Standings

**The Analyst** · 09-28-2009, 08:57 PM

Rad Chmiel made two astonishing blunders at the end of his game:

- the first was 63...Rxg5??, which actually deserves 3 question marks because it is wrong on that many level:

(1) Black's pieces were in optimal positions and he was the verge of placing white into zugwang - all he had to play was 63...a4, and white would have had to either lose either one of his pawns on the very next move (or the bishop if white played 64.Bh4?).

(2) Black gave up the most powerful piece on the board, one capable of cutting off white's king from the queenside, for one of lesser quality and value.

(3) Not only did black lose out materially, but he also allowed white to move one step closer to the queenside by capturing on g5.

- the second blunder was 65...Kxf6??, when again 65...a4 wins easily as white cannot get inside the pawn's "square" (i.e. the square bound by a4-a1-d1-d4) and therefore cannot capture the a-pawn which must therefore promote. Instead, the move played was simply a needless material grab that did nothing but allow white the vital tempo to get to a well-known theoretically drawn ending. I'm surprised a 1700-rated player would allow this.

**Just2Good** · 10-01-2009, 01:35 AM

Originally Posted by The Analyst

Rad Chmiel made two astonishing blunders at the end of his game:

- the first was 63...Rxg5??, which actually deserves 3 question marks because it is wrong on that many level:

(1) Black's pieces were in optimal positions and he was the verge of placing white into zugwang - all he had to play was 63...a4, and white would have had to either lose either one of his pawns on the very next move (or the bishop if white played 64.Bh4?).

(2) Black gave up the most powerful piece on the board, one capable of cutting off white's king from the queenside, for one of lesser quality and value.

(3) Not only did black lose out materially, but he also allowed white to move one step closer to the queenside by capturing on g5.

- the second blunder was 65...Kxf6??, when again 65...a4 wins easily as white cannot get inside the pawn's "square" (i.e. the square bound by a4-a1-d1-d4) and therefore cannot capture the a-pawn which must therefore promote. Instead, the move played was simply a needless material grab that did nothing but allow white the vital tempo to get to a well-known theoretically drawn ending. I'm surprised a 1700-rated player would allow this.

As always, an excellent review from The Analyst.

Mr Analyst, it is obvious you are a very strong chess player and I really enjoy your take on some of these games! Great job mate!

09-28-2009, 03:52 PM	#123 (permalink)
Jaydon SCTC Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Queensland, Gold Coast Posts: 1,101 ICC Handle: Aussieboy007 FICS Handle: Bermusia	Originally Posted by LMatheson Hey guys! I dug deep into my chessbase database of games and found a whole tournament that I hadn't posted from early 2008. It was one of my best from that time, and was what I would classify as a "breakthrough" tournament for me. I thought I'd seen that first game before! The second one you ever posted. How did you go in this tournament by the way?

09-28-2009, 06:12 PM	#124 (permalink)
LMatheson Siberian Chess Cub Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 318	Originally Posted by Jaydon I thought I'd seen that first game before! The second one you ever posted. How did you go in this tournament by the way? I came equal 4th: Standings

10-01-2009, 01:35 AM	#126 (permalink)
Just2Good Tin Cup Champ 2004 Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Cairns Posts: 6,233 ICC Handle: Advantage FICS Handle: Advantage	Great Analysis! Originally Posted by The Analyst Rad Chmiel made two astonishing blunders at the end of his game: - the first was 63...Rxg5??, which actually deserves 3 question marks because it is wrong on that many level: (1) Black's pieces were in optimal positions and he was the verge of placing white into zugwang - all he had to play was 63...a4, and white would have had to either lose either one of his pawns on the very next move (or the bishop if white played 64.Bh4?). (2) Black gave up the most powerful piece on the board, one capable of cutting off white's king from the queenside, for one of lesser quality and value. (3) Not only did black lose out materially, but he also allowed white to move one step closer to the queenside by capturing on g5. - the second blunder was 65...Kxf6??, when again 65...a4 wins easily as white cannot get inside the pawn's "square" (i.e. the square bound by a4-a1-d1-d4) and therefore cannot capture the a-pawn which must therefore promote. Instead, the move played was simply a needless material grab that did nothing but allow white the vital tempo to get to a well-known theoretically drawn ending. I'm surprised a 1700-rated player would allow this. As always, an excellent review from The Analyst. Mr Analyst, it is obvious you are a very strong chess player and I really enjoy your take on some of these games! Great job mate! __________________ . "The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing." ~ Isaiah Berlin ~

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

09-28-2009, 08:57 PM	#125 (permalink)
The Analyst Member Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 38	Rad Chmiel made two astonishing blunders at the end of his game: - the first was 63...Rxg5??, which actually deserves 3 question marks because it is wrong on that many level: (1) Black's pieces were in optimal positions and he was the verge of placing white into zugwang - all he had to play was 63...a4, and white would have had to either lose either one of his pawns on the very next move (or the bishop if white played 64.Bh4?). (2) Black gave up the most powerful piece on the board, one capable of cutting off white's king from the queenside, for one of lesser quality and value. (3) Not only did black lose out materially, but he also allowed white to move one step closer to the queenside by capturing on g5. - the second blunder was 65...Kxf6??, when again 65...a4 wins easily as white cannot get inside the pawn's "square" (i.e. the square bound by a4-a1-d1-d4) and therefore cannot capture the a-pawn which must therefore promote. Instead, the move played was simply a needless material grab that did nothing but allow white the vital tempo to get to a well-known theoretically drawn ending. I'm surprised a 1700-rated player would allow this.