|
« TAP TO LOG IN
|
ANNOTATED GAME
coaching match
taufiq (1277) vs. tugger (1598)
Annotated by: tugger (1200)
Chess opening: Four knights (C48), Rubinstein counter-gambit Maroczy variation
taufiq (1277) vs. tugger (1598)
Annotated by: tugger (1200)
Chess opening: Four knights (C48), Rubinstein counter-gambit Maroczy variation
 Interactive |
• |  Show all comments |
• | All annotated games | • | View chessboard as: |
| |||||||||
|
12. d4 |
an attempt to rectify his pawn structure... | ||||||||
| | |||||||||
|
12... O-O |
of course, i'm not going to make it easy for him... <<<(Tugger) That's a good move, simply bacuase if i take it, it sorts out your pawn structure, assuming you reclaim with the pawn... though i will decline to take, i will instead finally castle...>>> | ||||||||
| | |||||||||
|
13. b3 |
<<<(Taufiq) Yup, removing my double pawns, was the meaning of that move.. But now, in this fase of the game, I don't know what to do now.. :( My idea was to make a diagonal with the c2, b3 and a4-pawns...>>> | ||||||||
| | |||||||||
|
13... b5 |
<<<(Tugger) Yes, this has become a very tight position... i'm struggling to find a move too... it would be best for me to develop my last piece before trying to manouvre pieces for better position... i was going to play Be6, but d5 would give me problems, so i must play b6 or b5 to develop the bishop... b5 seems best as it threatens b4 if you advance your pawn on a3, this would give your knight less room to move and he would no longer control the centre... also i have the option of developing the bishop to a6, which threatens a developed attack on your rook while stabbing the knight with a pawn, that would lose you material, but it's easily defended, so it might not feel there is any gain by playing it... after Bb7 i will probably look at moving my queen, most likely to c7, then placing my rook on the same file as your queen, the good old x-ray attack... but of course this depends on your moves...>>> | ||||||||
| | |||||||||
|
14. dxe5 |
<<<(Taufiq) If you re-capture my pawn with your d-pawn, you're opening a line for queens-exchange..>>> | ||||||||
| | |||||||||
|
14... dxe5 |
<<<(Tugger) I suspected as much... it suits me fine, we're still level on material and i have a slightly superior pawn structure... we will both have one white bishop and a knight each, along with the rooks, so it should make for a close endgame... my plan should you take the queen will now be to trade off as many pieces as possible while attempting to maintian my pawn shape... if we took all the pieces bar the pawns and kings off the board now, i'd be favourite as you can only offer protection to your e pawns with your king, which needs to be mobile in an endgame, while my king can go roaming around the board looking for weak pawns... your plan should be to try and force me to double up pawns, or win a pawn outright...>>> | ||||||||
| | |||||||||
|
15. Qxd8 |
not sure if this is poor play or not... i'm happy to encourage endgame, as my pawn structure is superior, so the queen trade suits me... <<<(Taufiq) Ok, I'll try to remember your advice :)>>> | ||||||||
| | |||||||||
|
15... Rxd8 16. Rad1 |
another trade...? | ||||||||
| | |||||||||
|
16... Rxd1 |
<<<(Tugger) Well, since you've offered...!>>> | ||||||||
| | |||||||||
|
17. Rxd1 |
<<<(Taufiq) Maybe not a good idea to trade such amount of pieces ?>>> | ||||||||
| | |||||||||
|
17... Bg4 |
and the bishop trade forced, though his g-pawn will move to the f-file, offering support to his doubled pawns, thus strengthening his position... <<<(Tugger) I don't think it was the best tactic, mainly because i can now also force the bishop trade, but at least you are limiting my attacking options too... it probably increases the chance of a draw, but certainly decreases the chance of you winning... it will be harder to win pawns now...>>> | ||||||||
| | |||||||||
|
18. Rd6 |
! unpins the bishop with a tempo... see my gamenotes next... | ||||||||
| | |||||||||
|
18... Bxf3 |
<<<(Tugger) That's an excellent move... not only do you threaten a pawn, you also threaten Rxf6, which would win bishop and knight for rook, a good trade for you... this forces me to take your bishop, which will mean your e-pawns will have some support, freeing up your king in an endgame... there is still a weakness in your pawn structure, but not as much as there was... then you gain a tempo as i have to cover my pawn with the rook... like i say, an excellent move...>>> | ||||||||
| | |||||||||
|
19. gxf3 |
and i'm already beginning to think i should've left the bishops on the board... still, i have the slight advantage... | ||||||||
| | |||||||||
|
19... Rc8 20. Kf2 Kf8 21. f4 |
another attempt to rectify his pawn structure... <<<(Taufiq) Still doing good moves, or are there better moves to do ?>>> | ||||||||
| | |||||||||
|
21... b4 |
and now it gets tactical... i'm eyeing up the fork on e4, which is covered by the attacked knight... only two options for white... <<<(Tugger) I think f4 was an error, though only a subtle one... you have yielded a little control of e4, which, with your king and rook on the squares they are, is a crtical square... now only your knight covers that square... so i will play b4... your knight cannot move, or Nxe4 wins the rook, and with it the game... there are little options for you now... you will either come out of this a rook down, a knight down or a pawn down... obviously a pawn down is preferable... . honestly speaking, i think this is where your position collapses... don't be disappointed, as much can be learned from this... this game has proved to be a very good example of the difference doubled-up pawns can make... you have run out of attacking options, and will now be forced into defence... i could have forced the breakthrough by advancing my h and g pawns until my knight could be brought into it on that side, had you not played f4... all you have done is succombed to the pressure of having a positional disadvantage... you ran out of moves... . i don't doubt you'll save the rook and knight, but if you need any help with the analysis, just pm me before you move...>>> this is where my analysis is flawed, i predict here he will lose a pawn and his position will collapse, a bold statement which proves to be very wrong, making me look arrogant! | ||||||||
| | |||||||||
|
22. fxe5 |
indeed... the other was axb4, but that of course is merely a delay... he would then have to play fxe5 next go... | ||||||||
| | |||||||||
|
22... Ng4+ |
and now white has three pawns on the e-file, a huge disadvantage... | ||||||||
| | |||||||||
|
23. Kg3 |
definitely best... of course, white had to attack the knight, or he would lose his for nothing... and if 23. Kf3 Nxe5 24. Kf4 Ng6 and my knight is protected, his is attacked, and he's in check... his knight is lost with any hope of winning... <<<(Taufiq) 23. Kg3 is the best move, if you ask me ? In that way I protect my h-pawn.. If I moved 23. Kf3, then 23. ... Nxh2 would check me again..>>> | ||||||||
| | |||||||||
|
23... Nxe3 |
? with the benfit of hindsight, i think Nxe5 would've been stronger, but i was greedy and thought i would take the lead... <<<(Tugger) Yeah, Kg3 was definitely best... after good analysis, you're not yet on the verge of collapse, but i certainly have the stronger position now... those pawns on the e-file are a big problem for you... your biggest concern in endgame is the h g pawn push, with only one pawn defending... made possible due to your f-pawn moving onto the e file... and for you, i guess the best thing you can do is put pressure on my b c pawns, though i'm not sure you'll be able to succeed in winning back the pawn, i should be able to hold you off and pressure your e-pawns... you must avoid trading pieces, too... once you've lost one more, i can look at the pawn push...>>> | ||||||||
| | |||||||||
| |||||||||