I am starting to train to get good in chess so I'm looking for opponents whenever I have the chance. I'm still pretty weak, but I am seeing quick improvements.
I played four games vs Racenilatr today. After the last game, he said he was going to play starcraft but wanted me to review the games with him. I told him I only had a record of the final game so I'd have to do that one even though it wasn't the best game (I actually realized shortly before completing this long post that there is a record stored of every game!) We agreed that I'd make a post where I analyzed the game for him to learn from. I invite all the readers to discuss the game as well, and anybody new to chess can possibly learn from this.
White: Racenilatr Black: micronesia
1: d4
Queen's Pawn Opening. The Queen's Pawn opening move is somewhat slower than the popular e4, because White will not be able to castle for three more moves. Its advantage is that it gives White more control over tactical surprises and often provides more lasting initiative and pressure.
1: ... d5
Queen's Pawn Game. Black answers symmetrically, challenging the center directly.
2: Bg5
Levitsky Attack. In Queen's Pawn openings, there is always a problem: how to activate the c1-Bishop. By developing the Bishop outside the pawn chain (before White plays e3), White guarantees the Bishop a future, if only to trade it off. White wins 15% more than Black statistically.
2: ... Nc6
Out of opening book.
Additional Commentary: I'm not used to playing against this white opening, so I had no prior experience playing against it. I knew it wasn't a common opening because it violates the general rule of developing knights before bishops. I decided the pin on the pawn at e7 wasn't a big deal, so I developed my b8 knight. I was considering a fiancetto on the king's side in order to force him to respond to my threat on the d4 pawn, but didn't end up doing it.
3: Nf3
Develops a Knight.
3: ... Nf6
Releases the pin on Black's pawn at e7.
4: h4
This move doesn't seem to accomplish very much. It's rare that you want to move a rook's pawn two spaces this early in the game.
4: ... Bf5
Develops a bishop, and attacks white's weakest pawn at c2.
5: Qd2
Brings the queen out of the back row. Also attacks the b4 square, preventing the knight on c6 from advancing with the intent to target c2 and win a rook at a1.
5: ... Qd7
Enables the long castle.
Additional Commentary: This move proved to be very helpful, but I didn't yet know how I was going to use the queen when I moved it here.
6: a4
Similar to h4, I don't see this accomplishing very much. It would be better to develop a minor piece and/or get ready to castle.
6: ... e6
Backs up the pawn at d5 and the bishop at f5. Opens the diagonal for the f8 bishop which attacks the square at b4, and allows the c6 knight to advance.
7: e3
Backs up the d4 pawn and opens the diagonal for the f1 bishop.
7: ... Nb4
Threatens to fork the king and the rook at a1 by Nxc2. Is attacked by white's queen, but defended by black's bishop at f8.
8: c3
Ouch! Leads to 8...Nc2+ 9.Kd1 Nxa1 10.Bb5 c6 11.Ne5 Qc7 12.Bd3 Ne4 13.Qe2 f6 14.g4 fxe5 15.gxf5 exf5 16.dxe5 Nxg5 17.hxg5 Qxe5, which wins a bishop, a knight, and a pawn for a rook, a bishop, a knight, and two pawns. Much better is Na3, leading to 8...Ne4 9.Qd1 Bd6 10.c3 f6 11.Bf4 Bxf4 12.exf4 Nc6 13.Be2 O-O, which wins a bishop for a bishop. [spoiler]This was white's only meaningful blunder, but it cost the game. White was not able to recover and was eventually mated.[/spoiler]
8: ... Nc2+
Moves it out of harm's way and forks White's king and White's rook at a1.
9: Kd1
Moves it out of check.
9: ... Nxa1
Forks White's pawn at a4 and White's knight at b1.
10: c4
Ouch! Leads to 10...Ne4 11.Qc1 Nxf2+ 12.Ke1 Nxh1 13.Nc3 Nc2+ 14.Kd2 Ng3 15.Ne5 Qd6 16.Bf4 Nxf1+ 17.Qxf1, which wins a knight for a rook, a bishop, and a pawn. Much better is Bb5, leading to 10...c6 11.Ne5 Qc7 12.Bd3 Ne4 13.Qe1 Qa5 14.Nd2 Qxa4+ 15.Ke2 Nxd2 16.Qxd2 Bxd3+ 17.Nxd3, which wins a bishop and a knight for a bishop, a knight, and a pawn.
10: ... Qxa4+
Checks White's king.
Additional Commentary: This is where the earlier move Qd7 proved useful.
11: b3
Danger! Hangs the pawn at b3. Leads to 11...Qxb3+ 12.Ke2 Bxb1 13.Bxf6 Bb4 14.Bg5 dxc4 15.Ke1 Be4 16.Be2 Qb1+ 17.Bd1 Bd3 18.Qxb4 Nc2+ 19.Kd2 Qxb4+ 20.Kc1 Nxe3, which wins a bishop and a knight for a queen, a knight, and three pawns. Much better is Ke2, leading to 11...Bxb1 12.Qc1 Ne4 13.Qxb1 Qxc4+ 14.Kd1 Qb3+ 15.Kc1 Nxf2 16.Be2 Qa4 17.b3 Nxb3+ 18.Kb2 Nxh1 19.Qxh1, which wins a bishop and a knight for a rook, a knight, and three pawns.
11: ... Qxb3+
Checks White's king and creates a passed pawn on a7.
Additional Commentary: It is very important that white moves his king in the correct direction here. He should escape to the right to avoid the queen.
12: Kc1
White gives Black a forced mate opportunity. Much better is Ke2. Kc1 leads to 12...Qxb1# and mate.
12: ... Qxb1#
Checkmates White's king.
Post game analysis: This was weaker than a couple of your other games (hence the short game length). I think you were losing concentration at this point. As you practice more, it becomes easier to spot weak points in your defense that the opponent is targeting. This is the second or third time I caught you with a fork of the king and the rook with my knight, so make sure to watch out for that during games! If you want me to analyze any of our other games let me know. You better hurry if you want to take a win from me though... I just started reading the book Cloud recommended to me :p
On February 02 2009 11:54 Saracen wrote: i'll play you! do you have a uscf rating?
Not yet, although I just registered with them. I don't yet know what local events are available to me...
The chessmaster rating may not be a very accurate representation of what my uscf rating would be, but it took me a week to get myself even with the 1000 rating players, and since then I walked up to almost 1100 on their system.
But I'm pretty weak as I'm still learning some of the basics of proper play.
Cool, where are you playing these games? I'd love to join in. In the USCF system my rating was about 1150 two years ago, haven't played much since then.
We played on chess.com using their live play feature. I doubt that's the best place but it's really quick and easy to register and get started. I've used yahoo chess in the past also. If anyone has chessmaster grandmaster edition then I can play online with them using the online feature for that software, I suppose.
lol... i have an old DS Chess game... i might pull that out and see if ive gotten any worse i wonder if it has wifi... if it does ill play any1 else with it
Nice analysis of a somewhat poor game by white; he's got to learn to see those Kc2 forks coming. In addition, I would recommend a more basic king's pawn -> 2 knight's opening for a player of that level.
If anyone's interested in playing free online chess without registering, check out instantchess.com or some online flash version. However, it's important to note that skill levels vary drastically on those free, non-registration chess applications.
On February 02 2009 12:16 overpool wrote: Nice analysis of a somewhat poor game by white; he's got to learn to see those Kc2 forks coming. In addition, I would recommend a more basic king's pawn -> 2 knight's opening for a player of that level.
If anyone's interested in playing free online chess without registering, check out instantchess.com or some online flash version. However, it's important to note that skill levels vary drastically on those free, non-registration chess applications.
Yeah I commented to him that it's interesting he chose the queen's pawn, but he said he didn't know the difference. I guess it's good advice for him to start with the King's pawn (I always do).
I love blitz, its like playing starcraft on fastest versus playing it on just fast. Well maybe that isn't the best analogy, but it utilizes different skills than in long games. Blitz games (between equally skilled people), I find tend to be more tactical, where sacrifices are more likely to happen, and more aggressive play happens.
i hate blitz it's just not for me. idk how good the white player was because there were quite a few tactics that white could've fallen into not directly but potential (7. Bb4 skewering the queen and king but there is c3 to block but potential it could've been dangerous)
Sweet I love chess. Been playing it since I was 5. I own most everyone I know in RL but I don't play regularly and never really took the time to get competitive vs the masses.
Chess is a very fun game. It's perfectly balanced, super competitive and intense. (Hmm where have I heard this before)
On February 02 2009 12:56 LuckyFool wrote: Sweet I love chess. Been playing it since I was 5. I own most everyone I know in RL but I don't play regularly and never really took the time to get competitive vs the masses.
Chess is a very fun game. It's perfectly balanced, super competitive and intense. (Hmm where have I heard this before)
I'd argue the "perfectly" part.
White imo has a slight advantage and black should be happy equalizing to a draw. But silly arguements aside I agree with you completely. :D
if you want to get more advanced stuff, I recommend Kingscrusher on youtube... he does some great annotation of current and classic games, along with some opening system analysis.
Black is a solid player, no real surprises from him. White seems at a significantly lower play level. Rook pawns moves were both bad and the fork was obvious.
Nothing too surprising in this game. Just a good player playing someone who isn't good.
On February 02 2009 12:37 HnR)Insane wrote: I'll play some games with people, but only blitz or (preferrably) bullet.
Out of curiosity why do you prefer such high speed games?
I find long games boring, I prefer the fast action of high speed games. I like there to be a tradeoff between making more optimal moves versus using less time but attempting to flag your opponent.
It was really hard to read this/review this game as a chess instructor...
The game isn't really even worth sharing to ANY level player because it's on such a LOW level. We're talking like 400 vs 600 USCF...
Let's talk about something better chess related... like how if you're shitty and want to get better go download/buy CT-ART 3.0 and work on your tactics. Until you're better than 90% of every other player on earth (~1600USCF) you really shouldn't work on much more than your tactics. http://www.chesscentral.com/software/ct-arts-chess-tactics.htm
The white player should really get a lashing if he actually wanted advice on this game. Even a rank novice gets what went on in this one.
On February 02 2009 14:22 ChoboCop wrote: It was really hard to read this/review this game as a chess instructor...
The game isn't really even worth sharing to ANY level player because it's on such a LOW level. We're talking like 400 vs 600 USCF...
Let's talk about something better chess related... like how if you're shitty and want to get better go download/buy CT-ART 3.0 and work on your tactics. Until you're better than 90% of every other player on earth (~1600USCF) you really shouldn't work on much more than your tactics. http://www.chesscentral.com/software/ct-arts-chess-tactics.htm
The white player should really get a lashing if he actually wanted advice on this game. Even a rank novice gets what went on in this one.
Er I think you are being unfair. Everyone is a noob at some point.
PH: yeah you can castle either way. The kingside castle is the short castle (more common) and the queenside castle is the long castle.
On February 02 2009 12:37 HnR)Insane wrote: I'll play some games with people, but only blitz or (preferrably) bullet.
Out of curiosity why do you prefer such high speed games?
micro gogo i'm online
High speed games force players to think quickly when mid game hits and rely less on their endless bounds of memorized counters and openings.
IMO competitive chess has really changed and I used to be a big chess fanatic but it's just not what it used to be. Players with no intuition can still win against better players with opening knowledge and counters alone.
And it's not similar to saying "you memorize starcraft bo's same kind of thing" because it isn't.
I stopped playing chess when it moved from a game of intuition/foresight to a game of memorization. Don't get me wrong, there are still loads of intuition and foresight, it just seems to make more of a difference in advanced levels of play.
On February 02 2009 12:56 LuckyFool wrote: Sweet I love chess. Been playing it since I was 5. I own most everyone I know in RL but I don't play regularly and never really took the time to get competitive vs the masses.
Chess is a very fun game. It's perfectly balanced, super competitive and intense. (Hmm where have I heard this before)
It's not perfectly balanced, how can it be, it's turn based (someone has to go first). So it's like only getting to make your 5th worker after your opponent already made his.
Scheduling chess tournaments can be difficult sometimes because you need to make players alternate colors due to the imbalance in the game.
i play on chess.com Live, you can search Navilus @ http://www.chess.com/home/game_archive.html for my games and see how i sometimes hang pieces but when im not being a blind dumbass i can actually play a good game. i also just learned about En passant, i ended up winning the game but damn that gave me a big WTF
id like to play with anyone from TL, novice to advanced, just leave me a pm(with AIM i guess? not sure how to organize games on that site, if there's a /whisper system or whathaveyou), note I'm in eastern US for time zone conflicts.
if you're amazing you'd likely whoop me a few games until it will get interesting
I'd not mind playing a few games, seeing how I became pretty damn rusty lately. I was 2000 ELO player, but now I can't really play for that rating now. Dont really play chess online, but if someone up for some games they can hit me up on MSN (lemon@freemail.lt).
On February 02 2009 12:37 HnR)Insane wrote: I'll play some games with people, but only blitz or (preferrably) bullet.
Out of curiosity why do you prefer such high speed games?
micro gogo i'm online
High speed games force players to think quickly when mid game hits and rely less on their endless bounds of memorized counters and openings.
IMO competitive chess has really changed and I used to be a big chess fanatic but it's just not what it used to be. Players with no intuition can still win against better players with opening knowledge and counters alone.
And it's not similar to saying "you memorize starcraft bo's same kind of thing" because it isn't.
I stopped playing chess when it moved from a game of intuition/foresight to a game of memorization. Don't get me wrong, there are still loads of intuition and foresight, it just seems to make more of a difference in advanced levels of play.
On February 02 2009 12:56 LuckyFool wrote: Sweet I love chess. Been playing it since I was 5. I own most everyone I know in RL but I don't play regularly and never really took the time to get competitive vs the masses.
Chess is a very fun game. It's perfectly balanced, super competitive and intense. (Hmm where have I heard this before)
It's not perfectly balanced, how can it be, it's turn based (someone has to go first). So it's like only getting to make your 5th worker after your opponent already made his.
Scheduling chess tournaments can be difficult sometimes because you need to make players alternate colors due to the imbalance in the game.
You're just way way off. You're viewing chess in a very miopic prism.
Let me be succinct... Blitz chess is inferior for the purpose of strategy -- it makes the tactics artificial to the clock.
The reason the Chess bonjwa's are bonjwa's is because of their incredible understanding and calculation, all levels are a reflection of understanding + calculation... you seem to want to only play on understanding and not calculation.
You say inferior players win with opening traps... yes, sometimes they do. In practice though they usually attain winning positions and then falter. You have to give inferior players time to make inferior choices... (very sage advice in chess) Anyone who has played chess competitively on any level understands that the game is an excruciating struggle.
Your thesis is essentially that in today's Chess game (memorizing good positions) > (other aspects of chess) such that those with superior (other aspects of chess) cannot seem to topple those that (memorize good positions). What about what it takes to win good positions... you're just dismissing so much about the competition of Chess.
I think you need to further explore how chess knowledge is created/expounded, the trappings of competition, and your definition of 'memory' as it relates to them.
What cements my love of go is that the game has almost a 50% win rate for both white and black (White gets compensated 6.5 points [7.5 under area scoring] for taking the second move). this rule is called komi.
On February 02 2009 16:33 kefkalives wrote: What cements my love of go is that the game has almost a 50% win rate for both white and black (White gets compensated 6.5 points [7.5 under area scoring] for taking the second move). this rule is called komi.
Yeah this is good since it's statistically balanced... although you can't really implement it in chess.
On February 02 2009 17:20 motbob wrote: I just played the greatest game ever.... here it is:
On February 02 2009 12:37 HnR)Insane wrote: I'll play some games with people, but only blitz or (preferrably) bullet.
Out of curiosity why do you prefer such high speed games?
micro gogo i'm online
High speed games force players to think quickly when mid game hits and rely less on their endless bounds of memorized counters and openings.
IMO competitive chess has really changed and I used to be a big chess fanatic but it's just not what it used to be. Players with no intuition can still win against better players with opening knowledge and counters alone.
And it's not similar to saying "you memorize starcraft bo's same kind of thing" because it isn't.
I stopped playing chess when it moved from a game of intuition/foresight to a game of memorization. Don't get me wrong, there are still loads of intuition and foresight, it just seems to make more of a difference in advanced levels of play.
On February 02 2009 12:56 LuckyFool wrote: Sweet I love chess. Been playing it since I was 5. I own most everyone I know in RL but I don't play regularly and never really took the time to get competitive vs the masses.
Chess is a very fun game. It's perfectly balanced, super competitive and intense. (Hmm where have I heard this before)
It's not perfectly balanced, how can it be, it's turn based (someone has to go first). So it's like only getting to make your 5th worker after your opponent already made his.
Scheduling chess tournaments can be difficult sometimes because you need to make players alternate colors due to the imbalance in the game.
You're just way way off. You're viewing chess in a very miopic prism.
Let me be succinct... Blitz chess is inferior for the purpose of strategy -- it makes the tactics artificial to the clock.
The reason the Chess bonjwa's are bonjwa's is because of their incredible understanding and calculation, all levels are a reflection of understanding + calculation... you seem to want to only play on understanding and not calculation.
You say inferior players win with opening traps... yes, sometimes they do. In practice though they usually attain winning positions and then falter. You have to give inferior players time to make inferior choices... (very sage advice in chess) Anyone who has played chess competitively on any level understands that the game is an excruciating struggle.
Your thesis is essentially that in today's Chess game (memorizing good positions) > (other aspects of chess) such that those with superior (other aspects of chess) cannot seem to topple those that (memorize good positions). What about what it takes to win good positions... you're just dismissing so much about the competition of Chess.
I think you need to further explore how chess knowledge is created/expounded, the trappings of competition, and your definition of 'memory' as it relates to them.
I think you misunderstand.
I'm not saying memorizing openings/counters = 100% win. I'm saying it's becoming more important to have incredible knowledge and have a very large amount of openings/counters memorized because the understanding+calculation you talk about has reached such a high level. Strategy for chess games isn't really developed during the game anymore as it's been studied so much that players already know the best moves in many given situations.
On February 02 2009 12:37 HnR)Insane wrote: I'll play some games with people, but only blitz or (preferrably) bullet.
Out of curiosity why do you prefer such high speed games?
micro gogo i'm online
High speed games force players to think quickly when mid game hits and rely less on their endless bounds of memorized counters and openings.
IMO competitive chess has really changed and I used to be a big chess fanatic but it's just not what it used to be. Players with no intuition can still win against better players with opening knowledge and counters alone.
And it's not similar to saying "you memorize starcraft bo's same kind of thing" because it isn't.
I stopped playing chess when it moved from a game of intuition/foresight to a game of memorization. Don't get me wrong, there are still loads of intuition and foresight, it just seems to make more of a difference in advanced levels of play.
On February 02 2009 12:56 LuckyFool wrote: Sweet I love chess. Been playing it since I was 5. I own most everyone I know in RL but I don't play regularly and never really took the time to get competitive vs the masses.
Chess is a very fun game. It's perfectly balanced, super competitive and intense. (Hmm where have I heard this before)
It's not perfectly balanced, how can it be, it's turn based (someone has to go first). So it's like only getting to make your 5th worker after your opponent already made his.
Scheduling chess tournaments can be difficult sometimes because you need to make players alternate colors due to the imbalance in the game.
You're just way way off. You're viewing chess in a very miopic prism.
Let me be succinct... Blitz chess is inferior for the purpose of strategy -- it makes the tactics artificial to the clock.
The reason the Chess bonjwa's are bonjwa's is because of their incredible understanding and calculation, all levels are a reflection of understanding + calculation... you seem to want to only play on understanding and not calculation.
You say inferior players win with opening traps... yes, sometimes they do. In practice though they usually attain winning positions and then falter. You have to give inferior players time to make inferior choices... (very sage advice in chess) Anyone who has played chess competitively on any level understands that the game is an excruciating struggle.
Your thesis is essentially that in today's Chess game (memorizing good positions) > (other aspects of chess) such that those with superior (other aspects of chess) cannot seem to topple those that (memorize good positions). What about what it takes to win good positions... you're just dismissing so much about the competition of Chess.
I think you need to further explore how chess knowledge is created/expounded, the trappings of competition, and your definition of 'memory' as it relates to them.
I think you misunderstand.
I'm not saying memorizing openings/counters = 100% win. I'm saying it's becoming more important to have incredible knowledge and have a very large amount of openings/counters memorized because the understanding+calculation you talk about has reached such a high level. Strategy for chess games isn't really developed during the game anymore as it's been studied so much that players already know the best moves in many given situations.
I disagree. You don't need to memorize up to the 30th move for every opening and variation to be a strong competitor. Memorizing common openings is helpful for saving time and that's all. You'll rarely encounter the same board up to the 15th move unless you're both doing really standard openings. Any variation from what you've memorized requires a complete re-analysis of the situation and if you keep playing by memory you'll lose.
I was in the top 3 in my province four years in a row and I only know 4-5 moves into 4-5 openings. I simply thought really quickly. I played against lots of people who simply memorized an opening and variations but didn't actually understand the purpose of each piece. They would crumble easily after their opening didn't get them up materially.
I think it's more important to have good strategic insight into the game rather than experience.
wtf? How did I not see this for 3 whole freaking pages!?!?!? Thanks for giving me some knowledge in chess Micronesia. Next time you won't be so forutnate that i'm a newb!
I've just realized that I'm only a decent player when there is no (or a very long) time limit. Just knowing that my turn is being timed makes me really nervous. :S I guess it's something you have to get used to.
On February 03 2009 06:36 3clipse wrote: I've just realized that I'm only a decent player when there is no (or a very long) time limit. Just knowing that my turn is being timed makes me really nervous. :S I guess it's something you have to get used to.
In my experience you get over this pretty quickly. When I first started playing vs the computer a few months ago with a timer, even if it was a pretty big timer it messed me up... but now the timer doesn't bother me at all. I play 10 minutes +5 seconds per move without feeling pressured most of the time.
On February 03 2009 06:36 3clipse wrote: I've just realized that I'm only a decent player when there is no (or a very long) time limit. Just knowing that my turn is being timed makes me really nervous. :S I guess it's something you have to get used to.
In my experience you get over this pretty quickly. When I first started playing vs the computer a few months ago with a timer, even if it was a pretty big timer it messed me up... but now the timer doesn't bother me at all. I play 10 minutes +5 seconds per move without feeling pressured most of the time.
Bump .
Dont know if you sir have participated in real tournaments (IE, not online stuff which kinda sucks...), but time screws up so many players there. Im not even talking about blitz, but rapid (30 minutes for those of you who dont know). It would seem like its plenty of time, but all it takes is decent opponent and there's a fair chance it will come down to serious clock smashing .
On February 03 2009 06:36 3clipse wrote: I've just realized that I'm only a decent player when there is no (or a very long) time limit. Just knowing that my turn is being timed makes me really nervous. :S I guess it's something you have to get used to.
In my experience you get over this pretty quickly. When I first started playing vs the computer a few months ago with a timer, even if it was a pretty big timer it messed me up... but now the timer doesn't bother me at all. I play 10 minutes +5 seconds per move without feeling pressured most of the time.
Bump .
Dont know if you sir have participated in real tournaments (IE, not online stuff which kinda sucks...), but time screws up so many players there. Im not even talking about blitz, but rapid (30 minutes for those of you who dont know). It would seem like its plenty of time, but all it takes is decent opponent and there's a fair chance it will come down to serious clock smashing .
Yeah I can imagine. I might play in rated games IRL someday and then the fun begins.
On February 03 2009 06:36 3clipse wrote: I've just realized that I'm only a decent player when there is no (or a very long) time limit. Just knowing that my turn is being timed makes me really nervous. :S I guess it's something you have to get used to.
In my experience you get over this pretty quickly. When I first started playing vs the computer a few months ago with a timer, even if it was a pretty big timer it messed me up... but now the timer doesn't bother me at all. I play 10 minutes +5 seconds per move without feeling pressured most of the time.
Bump .
Dont know if you sir have participated in real tournaments (IE, not online stuff which kinda sucks...), but time screws up so many players there. Im not even talking about blitz, but rapid (30 minutes for those of you who dont know). It would seem like its plenty of time, but all it takes is decent opponent and there's a fair chance it will come down to serious clock smashing .
Yeah I can imagine. I might play in rated games IRL someday and then the fun begins.
On February 03 2009 06:36 3clipse wrote: I've just realized that I'm only a decent player when there is no (or a very long) time limit. Just knowing that my turn is being timed makes me really nervous. :S I guess it's something you have to get used to.
In my experience you get over this pretty quickly. When I first started playing vs the computer a few months ago with a timer, even if it was a pretty big timer it messed me up... but now the timer doesn't bother me at all. I play 10 minutes +5 seconds per move without feeling pressured most of the time.
Bump .
Dont know if you sir have participated in real tournaments (IE, not online stuff which kinda sucks...), but time screws up so many players there. Im not even talking about blitz, but rapid (30 minutes for those of you who dont know). It would seem like its plenty of time, but all it takes is decent opponent and there's a fair chance it will come down to serious clock smashing .
Yeah I can imagine. I might play in rated games IRL someday and then the fun begins.
4-4 nub
The tie-breaking game should go on tl. Betgame perhaps?
Nice blog micronesia. I'm the level where I know how to play chess, and I generally have beaten my family members and friends who know how to play, but I'm pretty sure you'd beat me pretty easy. I'd still like to play sometime. I haven't played a game of chess in months.
EPT
![[image loading]](http://i433.photobucket.com/albums/qq56/microacg/1a.png)
![[image loading]](http://i433.photobucket.com/albums/qq56/microacg/1b.png)
![[image loading]](http://i433.photobucket.com/albums/qq56/microacg/2a.png)
![[image loading]](http://i433.photobucket.com/albums/qq56/microacg/2b.png)
![[image loading]](http://i433.photobucket.com/albums/qq56/microacg/3a.png)
![[image loading]](http://i433.photobucket.com/albums/qq56/microacg/3b.png)
![[image loading]](http://i433.photobucket.com/albums/qq56/microacg/4a.png)
![[image loading]](http://i433.photobucket.com/albums/qq56/microacg/4b.png)
![[image loading]](http://i433.photobucket.com/albums/qq56/microacg/5a.png)
![[image loading]](http://i433.photobucket.com/albums/qq56/microacg/5b.png)
![[image loading]](http://i433.photobucket.com/albums/qq56/microacg/6a.png)
![[image loading]](http://i433.photobucket.com/albums/qq56/microacg/6b.png)
![[image loading]](http://i433.photobucket.com/albums/qq56/microacg/7a.png)
![[image loading]](http://i433.photobucket.com/albums/qq56/microacg/7b.png)
![[image loading]](http://i433.photobucket.com/albums/qq56/microacg/8a.png)
![[image loading]](http://i433.photobucket.com/albums/qq56/microacg/8b.png)
![[image loading]](http://i433.photobucket.com/albums/qq56/microacg/9a.png)
![[image loading]](http://i433.photobucket.com/albums/qq56/microacg/9b.png)
![[image loading]](http://i433.photobucket.com/albums/qq56/microacg/10a.png)
![[image loading]](http://i433.photobucket.com/albums/qq56/microacg/10b.png)
![[image loading]](http://i433.photobucket.com/albums/qq56/microacg/11a.png)
![[image loading]](http://i433.photobucket.com/albums/qq56/microacg/11b.png)
![[image loading]](http://i433.photobucket.com/albums/qq56/microacg/12a.png)
![[image loading]](http://i433.photobucket.com/albums/qq56/microacg/12b.png)
