TL Chess Match 4 - Page 124

On November 25 2011 09:11 Ng5 wrote:


That's not an apology, and one is not needed. For once you could try to think of me as a different person as you are and read what I actually write.

I don't want apologies or crap. It's not needed between friends, they can just come back after an argument and be natural like friends are supposed to be. (Which is hard to imagine in some cultures...)

And as much as I think humankind is retarded and I wouldn't want anyone to think I am similar to you - every chess player is my friend. As hard it is to believe for once.

Just as ever LoL or WoW player, or anyone I meet. It doesn't need to mean I like them. Or that I want to group with them.

Anyway. It's been a while I replied to stuff in this thread actively so let me see what's up on the last two pages.

On November 25 2011 09:20 Ng5 wrote:
Bxc7 was a reasonable possibility, but I feel there's a lot of inaccuracies here. I will try to explain.

Basically endgames are far easier or far harder than how I see you thinking about it.

The easy part is - you have to make decisions. Whether you want to win or draw.

The hard part is - realize the nuances in the position that tells the two from each other.

Bxc7 in my opinion could not be as 'tryhard' as one should want it to be if it's about winning. Rc1 also had a small problem to it and we'll see how Nd2 will end up now.

The problem is not that. The problem I see is not the particular lines. I'm pretty sure that you see a lot of good moves, and good lines. The problem I think is - you don't take five steps back to look at the picture from a distance.

You try to build from the branches and not from the roots.

It's endgame, and this is so even in middle game, and as such stems from the opening. You look at the position and answer - yes I want to win. And then you look at the position and answer - what combination of pieces do give me chances to win? What can and what can't I exchange. Is the current composition of material/pieces winning for me? If there's an exchange what does it change in total. Would it be better for me if I had one or two less rooks in general? Is the answer the same in both cases? Would I want to exchange the knight for the bishop? Etc.

There's a lot of particular exceptions when you lay these down. Exact lines that can make opposite coloured bishops still not a draw, or the side with three pawns up still losing, etc. I had lines where I would sac an exchange and three or four pawns and still win in a queenless position.

But in my opinion you are skipping these very important first step. Because once you answer those questions you could always have something to try and fall back on if you are out of ammunition. Some logic that you could try putting holes in or empower reasons for.

Just a few thoughts, I hope it does help you guys having a different perspective on some things. I can't be a lot more particular for the sake of the game, but I felt like telling you.