Skip to main content

Twitter chess tournament R5

In this round, I was paired up against a quite strong player, so I didn't have high expectations. I had even forgot about the game until about two hours before, and had very little time to prepare. Between feeding the children and getting them to bed, I took a brief look at a few of my opponent's games.

I found that he liked to play the French, so 1. e4 was out the window. Against 1. d4, he seems to like the English defense - an opening against which I have some experience. I refreshed my memory about the opening, and especially the variation in which black keeps his knight on g8 and plays Be7-f6. And what do you know? My opponent played this very line.

The first 9 moves were pure preparation from my side. After that, I was on my own. The game was quite even up to the point where I decided to push my e-pawn and realized that I had missed one of my opponent's resources, and he won the pawn by removing a defender. However, it cost him the bishop pair, so it wasn't all bad.

I played a speculative attack on the queen side, and managed to sideline his bishop and get a position in which I could regain the pawn. However, instead of doing this, I sacrificed an exchange for a strong pair of bishops and good coordination. After a few careless moves from my opponent, I managed to find a winning combination and end the game in my favor.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular reviews

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

Master of strategy

During the past two years, I’ve been working on improving my strategic/positional play. In this process, I have read a number of books, and two books that have long been on my reading list are the strategy books by Johan Hellsten. So when the Swedish chess federation requested reviewers for two of these books, I didn’t hesitate. I am happy that I was given the opportunity to review these books, and hope this review can be of help to you as a reader. If you like these reviews, please consider supporting my work. Visit my patreon page for details. Become a Patron! What can you expect from these books? Johan Hellsten has created a name for himself as one of the leading experts of chess strategy in modern times. His series of strategy books ( Mastering Opening Strategy , Mastering Chess Strategy and Mastering Endgame Strategy ) have received glowing reviews from many parts of the chess world. So it feels good to finally dig into these nuggets. His endgame book is still in my boo...
Post a Comment
Read more

Stop and reassess!

In my very first post on this blog, I reviewed The Amateur's Mind by Jeremy Silman. That was my first step to understand chess strategy. And I actually bought another one of Silman's book at the same time, but for some reason, it took me more than ten years to read. I finally decided to go through it and now I am ready to share my thoughts with you. (It feels like I've written this before.) 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? Before writing this review, I had a few candidates. I am always reading several books in parallel, and I have a number that I'm about to finish. So I asked the Twitter community for input on which book they would like me to review as number 50. And this came out on top. So far I have reviewed 49 books on #patzersreview . Which one should be number 50? My candidates are: - Silman: Reassess your chess workbook - Nunn: Solving in...
Post a Comment
Read more

My system should be your system?

One of the greates classics of chess literature. That's at least what it says on the cover. But let's not judge a book by the cover. Instead, we could listen to what others have said about this book. In his review of My system , John Watson writes: "We no longer consider many classics to be essential to a chess education, not since the Internet; but if there’s an exception, Nimzowitch’s work is it". These are big words from a big man. Watson is an authority of chess theory, so his evaluation should not be taken too lightly. Although My system has frequently been mentioned among the greatest books of all time, and has been recommended by many players , it has also been the subject of controversy. Of course, when the book was first published (almost 100 years ago), many ideas in the book challenged many of the established principles of chess theory at the time, and other authorities dismissed the ideas. But also to this day, many people are unimpressed with the b...
Post a Comment
Read more

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