Review of Daily Game vs LDroid

 Review of this game: https://www.chess.com/game/daily/691709569

-white move 6, I think that basically this is one of the problems with this variation.

Basically if the opponent has some idea that I play it and wants to stop it then they can.

So that feels a bit mixed.

Obviously you can't have your way all the time in chess.

And it is also kind of unclear how good these variation stoppers are.

But it just makes me think a bit.

But I didn't bother to look it up because it is not a book move I know and I think I played ok afterwards.

 

-white move 10, so basically I get half of what I wanted. I wanted to get rid of my bad bish and eliminate his good bish. So here he voluntarily gives up the light square bishop for my knight. Kind of seems bad but maybe I am kind of overvaluing the advantage I get.

 

-black move 14, I feel mixed. clearly white is showing aggressive intent on the K-side. so maybe making pawn moves and trades there is anti-positional. But on the other hand I always feel ambivalent about the f6 pawn break. I think I don't really know when it is good and when it is bad. That was one thing that frustrated me about Heisman. He just kind of refused to answer about that and it kind of felt like he was blaming me for asking.

 

-black move 15, developing the bishop. the downside is that the g5 square is not defended by a pawn which it would have been if I had played gxf6.

 

-black move 16, I clearly wasn't sensitive to the danger here. I just make a one move threat that does nothing and actually weakens my defenses because it makes me unable to play g6 in reply to Qh5. I probably should have considered BxN more. Not really sure why I didn't. I think it was a combination of things. I think I was worried about opening the h-file. I also think I was not wanting to give up the bishop pair so easily. Also, this is my good bishop. But honestly these may be ex post facto reasons when the real reason is I just didn't see the danger and thought the knight move was premature and I could just easily kick it.

 

-the opponent plays the attack well, winning two pawns. I trade queens because generally trading queens will dampen attacking chances. But on the other hand it is said that you shouldn't trade when you are down material.

 

-black move 22, I  think Rf8 is better. It gets my last piece developed and also defends the bishop so I don't have to split my pawns when he trades knight for bish.

 

-black move 24, I guess this is why I played 22. I get my knight to an outpost blockading his passed but isolated pawn.

 

-black move 26, I just blunder a third pawn. Just not playing carefully. I had probably given up mentally already but didn't want to resign yet. if I am going to continue I should play h5.

 

-my other weak pawn proves easy to pick off. I am down four pawns and he has his whole k-side as passed pawns.

 

I think several things stand out for me:

 

-first off, black move 14. I really feel like I need to work on learning how to handle this f6 break. I know it is good sometimes but I feel like really uncomfortable with playing it because I don't know how to handle it. So part of that is like deciding when it is good to play and when it is not. Second is just like the follow up like in this game. Is it always better to recapture with the g-pawn? or is capturing with a piece sometimes good? So in terms of actions on this I already tried the action of asking a stronger player. That didn't work out. So I think another action is to just do like here and play it and try to learn from experience and reviewing my games. I will try to keep an eye out for any commentary in materials I come across such as in opening books or whatnot. I guess my evaluation here just on my own is that it wasn't terrible. At least it wasn't game losing or anything. I even think Bxf6 may not be terrible. It was more the follow up and how I handled his aggression.

 

-secondly, black move 16. I am not sensitive to the danger and I make a dumb superficial move that only makes the situation worse. Like wetzell talked about this is an example of making a pawn move in reply to something without really accounting for its balance sheet. But overall I need to work on my sense of danger.

 

-thirdly, black move 22. I have a decent idea of getting my knight to the oupost but I significantly weaken my pawns by allowing them to be split. Rf8 would have developed a piece and prevented that.

 

-fourthly, black move 26. Both Heisman and Wetzell stress the importance of resigning if you have given up and if you haven't resigned to keep fighting like a lion. This is a weak move that is questionable even if it didn't blunder a pawn because I am trading when down in material. I think I had given up mentally and wasn't meeting the challenge of defending down two pawns.

 

============

 

chess.com review

 

-it likes his 10 Bxc6. it says it is the only move. Not sure why Be2 isn't good. It says Be2 loses a pawn to Nf5 Be3 (defending the more important d-pawn) and Qxb2. And Bd3 isn't good because after Nxd4 Nxd4 Qxd4, white has no check with the light squared bishop to win the queen so I have just won the d-pawn.

 

-instead of h6 it shows castles kingside. I kind of thought that would be castling into the attack (if I considered it). but I suppose if he plays Qh5 then I have Bxg5.

 

-also on move 25 it doesn't like f5, saying h5 is better which certainly would have freed my rook.