Down a bishop, rook, and pawn - and I win!
Sort:
Recently I played a game with a friend and fell victim to a very simple trap early on. This made me extremely mad and I just threw my knights at him with little regard to actually winning the game. Until I realised that dispite being a rook, a bishop, and a pawn down - I managed to put myself in the lead through much better positioning. I eventually regained those pieces and checkmated my opponent. I'm very proud of this game, and consider it one of my best wins. My question is: at what point in the game is checkmate inevitable for my friend?
May 1, 2008
0
#2
That's quite a wild game! Try to consider what your opponents threats are each move and you won't have to dig yourself out of such deep holes in the future! 
er, you're so right, sonofpearl...18.Qc7 is mate, fr'instance
a useful bit of defensive patterning to fix in one's head is that Na3 (instead of c3 or d2) protects against the K and R fork on c2 (ditto for the analogous positions on the other corners of the board.)
Well done man. However you have to admit you got lucky too. Move 12... Nxe4 was in truth a mistake. One he didn't notice bytheway. If he had played 13. Qxe7+ ; Kc6 (forced) 14..Qxe4 and your position was prety much lost. Or better yet.. after ....Kc6 14 Qe8+ ; Bd7 (forced) 15 Qxa8 taking the other rook. Still this is quite a psychological game, so he probably worried about his own king when he should have finished what he started.
White could also have done. 16Qxe7+, Kc3 (forced) 17. Qc7#
That is quite a neat win. I think your opponet made a lot of mistakes, but not giving up on your part showed some true tenacity. If nothing else, this game is an excellent example that games aren't over until checkmate.
Yeah, his d4 square is horribly weak. I was working on exploiting that and pinning his dark squared bishop (if he moved it, I'd have his rook), which is what made me miss the Queen attack. It's rare that you get a chance to gain experience AND win the game. I learned two lessons - always pay attention to what the knights are up to, and the game is never over until it's over. Fight back.
donkarton wrote: why not 9.Qg8 ?
Because I would immediately take his queen with my rook or knight.
May 6, 2008
0
#11
9.Qg8 than it isnt possible to take the queen with a rook or knight only with your queen and than you take that queen with your rook which takes it out of danger for the horse and this would mean you wouldnt have lost a rook
donkarton wrote: 9.Qg8 than it isnt possible to take the queen with a rook or knight only with your queen and than you take that queen with your rook which takes it out of danger for the horse and this would mean you wouldnt have lost a rook
My opponent would have never made that move though. 9. Qg8 is impossibly idiotic. No one moves his queen in the line of fire of two different pieces. I'm not following you.
moja wrote: Sloppy game. From both players...
Hey, thanks for coming.
Yes, they've already been pointed out. The interesting part of this game is the psychological component. My attack made him so worried about losing that he stopped focusing on his attack. I realise fully that this kind of psychological play would never work against a master - but in a friendly game, it truly shows that there is more to chess than just what's on the board.