|
« TAP TO LOG IN
|
ANNOTATED GAME
Beating Chess Titans on Level 10 (Full annotation)
Ben vs. Chess Titans Level 10
Annotated by: gmflash2008 (1200)
Chess opening: QGD Slav (D10), Winawer counter-gambit
Ben vs. Chess Titans Level 10
Annotated by: gmflash2008 (1200)
Chess opening: QGD Slav (D10), Winawer counter-gambit
 Interactive |
• |  Show all comments |
• | All annotated games | • | View chessboard as: |
| ||||||||
Here is a game I played against the microsoft chess program found on Vista. I set it to level 10 (highest difficulty) and gave myself 1 hour for 40 moves.
| ||||||||
|
1. d4 |
I always do this with white nowadays. | |||||||
| | ||||||||
|
1... d5 |
Typical response. | |||||||
| | ||||||||
|
2. c4 |
And this. | |||||||
| | ||||||||
|
2... c6 |
Semi-slav. This was the moment I started thinking.. 'OK, now the computer is going to murder me'. | |||||||
| 2 comments | ||||||||
|
3. Nc3 |
Pretty standard development. | |||||||
| | ||||||||
|
3... e5 |
Pretty surprising. Had to think now where to put my knight after dxe5 4...d4. I was initially planning for 5. Nb1, but I just felt that this was back sliding. | |||||||
| 1 comment | ||||||||
|
4. dxe5 |
What else? I had seen that I will lose this pawn anyway so it was a case of thinking 'where is the best place for the knight after Qh5+ an Qxe5?' | |||||||
| | ||||||||
|
4... d4 |
As forseen. | |||||||
| | ||||||||
|
5. Ne4 |
I decided at this moment that if Qh5 i could go Nd2 and block the check. Then after Qxe5 I would play Ndf3 and fork queen and pawn. | |||||||
| | ||||||||
|
5... Qa5+ |
But after the check Nd2 would be asking for a passive position. It (the computer) could develop further with Bb4 and tie me down. | |||||||
| | ||||||||
|
6. Bd2 |
When playing the computer I always try to force the issue. | |||||||
| | ||||||||
|
6... Qxe5 |
Equal on material again but the computer has gained two very good bishops. I had an small suspicion that something had already gone wrong. | |||||||
| | ||||||||
|
7. Ng3 |
I felt this was forced. Defending it with Qc2 would be asking for trouble because of Blacks active bishops. (Bf5 for example) | |||||||
| | ||||||||
|
7... Qd6 |
Stepping away from my tempo gaining Nf3. | |||||||
| | ||||||||
|
8. Qc2 |
I didn't want black developing his bishops to excellent squares later so I thought this move was good. Also defends c4 and prepares 0-0-0 (my initial plan - from which I chickened out of completely). | |||||||
| | ||||||||
|
8... Nf6 |
Defends some light squares in the middle of the board. | |||||||
| | ||||||||
|
9. Nf3 |
I was happy with my knights at this point. They re controlling most of the centre. Still developing though. | |||||||
| | ||||||||
|
9... c5 |
Quite a strong (and annoying) pawn wedge there. But I thought I would undermine this later with Rd1 and e3. In hindsight I should have gone 0-0-0 next but I was too concerned about having a safe king on the kingside. Almost a flaw, almost falling into a category of closed-mindedness. | |||||||
| | ||||||||
|
10. Ne4 |
On this move I spent a long time. I thought about Nf5, Bxf5 and Qxf5 threatening Qc8+ but didn't think it led anywhere. I thought about 0-0-0 and chickened out. I think my decision in the position just came back to the strategy of forcing moves against the computer. I noticed c5 weakened the h1-a8 diagonal and I had hazy, distant plans of g3 and Bg2 and Bf4. At the time this seemed very active, it centralised my queen and gave me options on the kingside. | |||||||
| 1 comment | ||||||||
|
10... Nxe4 |
Moving the queen would lose a tempo so this is forced. | |||||||
| | ||||||||
| ||||||||