Heinzk loses
Much less fun and much more bothersome than gloating over your fantastic wins, but these are games of chess that had me on the other side of the board... looking at your own mistakes is a lot less attractive than looking at the way you gloriously screw your opponents after they slip up.
When you replay these three little games, it can be hardly imagined that I don't lose nearly all of the games of Chess I decide to be part of. But the sad truth is that weaker chess players participate in bad games of chess the majority of the time... all the time in fact.
I had intended to replay these games anyway...
because I knew that apart from the bunch of nice scalps (collected in the previous blog msg),
the same opponents provided more than enough food for thought too.
So here I score 0.0/3.
Outwitted by a Fide Master from Slovenia
Play chess online
So why did I lose this game?
1 - lack of ready opening knowledge & plans
2 - a strong opponent
3 - a very tricky position that had large possible movements too complicated for me to evaluate properly in a short amount of time... the board was a "minefield".
4 - in such jagged positions, it cannot reasonably be expected a guy like me never loses.
5 - I always seem to underestimate far advanced pawns - because, if all goes right, those rascals shouldn't be there anyway - and miss possible promotion maneuvers/tricks.
That about sums it up.
Nicely outplayed by an English IM
Play online chess
Outclassed by an English Grandmaster
Play chess online
Brrr... let's forget these fast. Here's a
Funky Chess Problem
White to move, mate in three. Composed by George Edward Carpenter, Checkmate 1903.
Hint: Good luck :-p
The geat thing about losing in chess is you get to make the podium as a silver medalist ...woohoo :).
ReplyDeleteI didn`t try the problem again today since I definitely consider 3 a much scarier number than 2.
NM-Dale