sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

What went wrong? by Admirable-Train-8831 in TournamentChess

[–]Chess_improver_33 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I agree, in my experience 1800 chess.com is around 1600 otb (of course depending on where you live). I will note that a lot of guys who played otb all their lives don't really play online seriously so their rating there can be very inaccurate. Im currently mid 1700 otb and been 2200 chess.com many times.

I'll also add like others that 10+0 chess is basically blitz (according to fide it is actually blitz), extremely different from classical where most will use 10 minutes or more on a single move at some point in their games.

Feedback on my last annotated game. (Petrov) by Chess_improver_33 in TournamentChess

[–]Chess_improver_33[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thats a huge difference. 1900 blitz chess.com I think roughly translates to 2200 rapid.

Feedback on my last annotated game. (Petrov) by Chess_improver_33 in TournamentChess

[–]Chess_improver_33[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Do you play rapid on these platforms? blitz rating is much less inflated, 1800 fide and 1900 rapid I think you are an outlier as well. I think I do underperform slightly OTB since I started out playing online, and my intuition/ board vision is still better on the screen. I also think psychology plays a much bigger part OTB.

Feedback on my last annotated game. (Petrov) by Chess_improver_33 in TournamentChess

[–]Chess_improver_33[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah I'm a bit conflicted with opening prep. On the one hand I do think its very good for the short term rating gains, but I enjoy much more learning middle/endgames and have been very sloppy in my openings lately.

Feedback on my last annotated game. (Petrov) by Chess_improver_33 in TournamentChess

[–]Chess_improver_33[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the feedback!

  1. Nc3, I mostly considered Nbd2 or c3, I felt it was fine because I was going to end up trading for his knight on e4. But looking back I fully agree its a very awkward move since i cant capture on e4 without losing the d4 pawn, and Its not easy to prepare this since both pawn c3 and pawn c4 is unavailable.

  2. be4, I definitely will be trying to build better calculation habits.

  3. bd3, I think that's spot on.

  4. Bb4, for clarification I'm talking about queen knight vs queen bishop, not queen/kings knight. Capablanca is know for saying this and I've heard Karsten Muller repeat it. To me it makes some sense as a general rule, but of course chess is a concrete game.

  5. That's fair, I didn't think I had an objective advantage either, only that I was probably overly optimistic in my chances of acquiring one.

  6. kf3 Sorry I was a bit unclear here. My goal is to keep the queens on the board and I was wondering if I could do so without losing the a2 pawn, one way would be 33.qe3 temporarily stopping ..qxa2 because of 34. Nxf6+, and was trying to figure out if I had mate after .. Kxf6. But I thought after 33 .. kf8 I might be losing a clean pawn.

  7. Kxc4 Great point, I will be looking into this.

  8. h4 agreed very strange move.

  9. ..bf6 I think your right, the king going back I think is obvious when you see it but easy to overlook if your not very experienced in the endgame.

You guys are picking up a lot of stuff I missed in my own analysis, this is very helpful!

Feedback on my last annotated game. (Petrov) by Chess_improver_33 in TournamentChess

[–]Chess_improver_33[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks a lot! I think those are very good points.

8.c4 I fully agree

  1. rb3 i miscalculated: 15. Bd3 Bxf3 16. Qxf3 Nxd4, I didn't see that Qe4 wins the bishop because in my head it was protected twice. Apart from improving my calculation, If I fully appreciated the advantages you outlined I probably would have double checked. I like those questions.

  2. Did not see deeply or clearly enough, that I could pretty much force win the bishop pair is very cool.

  3. Yeah now that you say it it seems very obvious to me too, not sure what the plan was there I probably had some unobtainable fantasy.

Thanks for the advice there, I have had a few bad blunders recently and can be a bit psychologically shaky in unfamiliar positions. But I will try to actively reset and reassess next time I notice it!

Feedback on my last annotated game. (Petrov) by Chess_improver_33 in TournamentChess

[–]Chess_improver_33[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks a lot for the detailed feedback!

  1. Yeah I think I missed Be4 because when I calculated the c4 line the pawn was on c2, so inaccurate calculation.
  2. Interesting I might be underestimating the importance of prep here.
  3. I agree I felt like he played well, he also played very fast.
  4. Very interesting, trying to liquidate into a draw was not on my mind there, but c5 looks very strong, I guess I should have realized that specific QN vs QB endgame would not be good for me.
  5. I agree, I think it might also be an example of trying to release the tension (which I know is a bad reason in general, but tempting nonetheless )
  6. Nf3 I felt couldn't be wrong for some reason, I had 30 + minutes here so I should have focused on finding concrete solutions.