Skip to main content

Twitter chess tournament R4

Round 4, and I am paired up against an opponent I know next to nothing about. I checked his Lichess profile, and found just a few games. I saw that he had played the London system a few times, so that was my best guess as to what I could expect.

The game was a bit dry. Both players made a few mistakes and failed to fully utilize each other's mistakes. After a few positional inaccuracies from my opponent, I had a chance to play for a win, but didn't manage to find the right continuation. The game ended in a draw.

I gave the resulting position to an FM at my club, and asked his opinion about it. He said the pushing b4 was not necessarily the right plan. Rather, he suggested playing g5 and opening up the kingside. In his opinion, doubling on the g-file would be a good try for black.

My opponent arrived at a similar conclusion after having fed the position toan engine and having it play the game out. The computer closed up the queenside and went for a kingside attack. Black won after roughly 60 moves.

So even when a position seems dead drawn, there might still be some play left. Perhaps I should try harder next time.

Please see the inline annotations for more details.


Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular reviews

Under the surface

I did something different. I bought a chess book without doing any research. I decided to reward myself with a new book after having written ten reviews. So I asked my friends on Twitter for suggestions, and someone suggested that I take a look at the book Under the surface by Jan Markos. Since the book is quite new, I couldn't find much information about it, so I decided to blindly trust the recommendation. Luckily, I was not let down. What can you expect from this book? I am not the only one who has done something different. Jan Markos did the same when he wrote Under the surface . He takes a quite philosophical approach to chess, which should probably be expected from a former student of philosophy. This comes across quite clearly in his choice of chapter titles. The names "Magnetic Skin", "Anatoly Karpov's Billiard Balls" and "On the Breaking Ice" are not the most transparent chapter titles in the world. But once you get under the surfa...
Post a Comment
Read more

Think like a Super-GM

In my previous review I mentioned how I would like to see an improved version of The Improving Chess Thinker , and that a book had recently come out that seemed to be perfectly in line with my ideas. A few months later, I have bought the book, worked through the exercises and read the prose. And finally, I am ready to give my complete review of the new book Think like a Super-GM . And I can tell you, I was not disappointed by this book. Read on to find out why you should probably get the book too. If you like these reviews, please consider supporting my work. Visit my patreon page for details. Become a Patron! What can you expect from this book? As the title indicates, Think like a Super-GM is a book about thinking in chess. At its core, it is a puzzle book. But it is more than that. In the chapters surrounding the puzzles, the book digs into the challenges of thinking in chess and how the thinking process differs between players of different levels. The first chapter ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Understanding middlegames

Have you ever found yourself unable to find a move in the middlegame? Of course you have. We all have. About ten years ago, this was a recurring problem for me, which led to a lot of frustration. My conclusion was that I needed to learn how understand middlegames. So what better way than to read a book with the title Understanding Chess Middlegames ? Sound like the perfect remedy, right? Ok, let's find out. If you like these reviews, please consider supporting my work. Visit my patreon page for details. Become a Patron!   What can you expect from this book? I first read this book when I was just starting to study chess seriously. I bought it after reading a recommendation in an online forum. I would say this was ten years ago, but the book came out 2011, so it couldn't have been before that. Anyhow, my playing strength was probably around 1200 (I was unrated at the time) and I was having trouble choosing moves in non-tactical positions. Basically, I was playing without ...
1 comment
Read more

Learn chess tactics

Where should you turn for tactics training? This is a frequently occuring question, not only from beginners, but also from intermediate players. Which books are suitable for your specific level, and which ones should you get? In this review, I take on a book that I suggest you do get - at least if you're at or near the beginning of your chess development. This was actually my first tactics book back in the day, and I recently reread it in order to give a proper review. I remember that I liked it the first time around and that my tactical skills improved. Although rereading it didn't contribute all that much to my learning, I still have a good impression of it. Please read on for more details. If you like these reviews, please consider supporting my work. Visit my patreon page for details. Become a Patron! What can you expect from this book? Learn Chess Tactics is written by the one and only John Nunn, and (as the name implies) it is a tactics book. I would go as f...
Post a Comment
Read more

Estimating playing strength

Have you ever felt like your chess rating doesn't represent your actual playing strength? Sometimes we want to be able to estimate playing strength based on individual games rather than rating (which changes more slowly). During the past few months, I've been taking a number of online courses and learning python for data analysis. In one of the courses, the final project allowed me to choose my own dataset. So surprise surprise! I chose something chess related. (Not really surprised, are you?) When we play games online, getting a computer evaluation is just a few clicks away. And a commonly used statistic is the average centipawn loss, or simply the average deviation from the computer's best move. Many of us tend to think that centipawn loss (CPL) is a good estimate of playing strength. And, of course, it gives some indication, but it's far from a perfect predictor. Fellow chess/statistics blogger Patrick Coulombe has investigated the correlation between rating and CPL ...
Post a Comment
Read more