BLACK LOST IN CARO-KANN IN 20 MOVES

The rapid game Mikromeister - Blitzenemy (CHESSCom 2024) lasted only 20 moves.

The notation of the game is below:

[Event "Live Chess"]

[Site "Chess.com"]

[Date "2024.12.02"]

[White "Mikromeister"]

[Black "Blitzenemy"]

[Result "1-0"]

[TimeControl "900+10"]

[WhiteELO "2184"]

[BlackELO "2232"]

[ECO "B10"]

     1.      e4            c6      

     2.     Nc3            d5      

     3.     Nf3          dxe4      

     4.    Nxe4           Nf6      

     5.     Qe2          Nxe4      

     6.    Qxe4           Nd7      

     7.     Bc4           Nf6      

     8.     Ne5            e6      

     9.     Qe2            b5      

    10.     Bd3           Qc7      

    11.      b3           Bd6      

    12.     Bb2           O-O      

    13.     O-O            a6

    14.      f4            c5

    15.      a4            b4

    16.     Nc4          Bxf4 

    17.    Bxf6          gxf6      

    18.     Qg4+          Bg5      

    19.    Rxf6           Kh8      

    20.     Qh5 

   

            1-0

BE CAREFUL

A position from the rapid game Mikromeister - Thanzler, CHESSCom 2024.

White to move.

MY WRONG COMBINATION WAS SUCCESSFUL

In the rapid game aromeoallepuz - Mikromeister, in the Steinitz Defence Deferred, I made a false combination. 

In a fascinating tactical battle, my opponent failed. I was lucky.

For the analysis, see below.

SICILIAN c3 IS DANGEROUS FOR BLACK

The Alapin variation, 2 c3, in the Sicilian Defence, is pretty dangerous for Black if one does not know precisely what one is doing in the opening.

The rapid game Mikormeister - Bahamapapa was short:

Here is my analysis of the game:

IT IS BETTER TO CASTLE AWAY FROM

Often, it is better to castle in the open positions, even if it costs some material.

In the rapid game played on CHESSCom, my opponent was too late to castle.

Mikromeister - Axumzs, CHESSCom 2024

Below is the analysis of the game

I SHALL STOP SOLVING CHESSCOM PUZZLES

OK. I have received a puzzle rating above 3400. One day, it was 3448. 

I shall stop solving CHESSCom puzzles from now on.

The reason is the poor quality of the puzzles with higher ratings. The rating points and the target times are also not well-tuned.

Yesterday, I got Kubbel's endgame study as a "tactics puzzle" to solve with the target time of 30 seconds.

Today, I got several messy positions as "tactics puzzles".

The last "puzzle" was not convincing at all. It looked somewhat like an attack with several options to continue that attack at several points.

It is evident that no human being has ever checked these positions and their solutions; there is too much trust in computer algorithms.

The themes of the puzzles are too often highly misleading, too.

By the way, other chess platforms have similar features.

CHESSCom puzzle rating 3448

WHITE TO MOVE

White to move and win

FEN:

8/8/1p1K4/Pp6/2k1p3/8/1P6/8 w - - 0 2

I am sharing here the CHESSCom puzzle (#59358) that I failed to solve. Its pass rate is below 20%.

The puzzle itself is excellent.

However, I am dissatisfied with the so-called "target time," which is below 1 minute in the present case.

If you are not well-trained in the queens' endgames and/or not acquainted with the rare theme included in that puzzle, then hardly you can solve that puzzle in 10 minutes.

Please note that I keep in mind that you have to see the solution from beginning to end before moving any pieces! You do not "solve" the puzzle; if you are making naturally looking moves, the computer replies, and you arrive at the crucial position to start calculating the difficult move.

Thus, it is not a tactics puzzle at all. Rather, it is an endgame etude, problem.

The other obstacle is that the CHESSCom puzzles, even those with a high rating, are usually standard. 

Nevertheless, solving any such puzzle gives only 5 points, independent of its difficulty. 

I have obtained a rating above 3400 in puzzles on CHESSCom. Unfortunately, I do not believe I could progress further because, at that high level, the puzzles are less tested due to the fewer solvers. There are already too many invalid puzzles like that one, which demands that you be a Carlsen and solve in a few minutes what others are solving in one hour.

PS

Indeed, one commenter on CHESSCom writes:

"It is a study by Kubbel, BTW."

A TRAP

My opponent in the ChessDotCom rapid game fell into a trap 39...Nc3-e2...

White to move

A TACTICAL TRAP IN THE TWO KNIGHTS DEFENCE

There are so many tactical traps in the Two Knights Defence. 

Here, again. 

I had black pieces in the rapid game flippy2222 - Mikromeister on the ChessDotCom.

TACTICS: TWO KNIGHTS DEFENCE, 4 d3

With black pieces, I had an interesting rapid game on ChessDOTCom:

juradolebron - Mikreomeister 2024

BLACK TO MOVE

Find the only winning move for Black.

Black to move and win

From the Chesstempo rapid game Paldrick - Nanomaster, I had black pieces.

PAUL KERES DID NOT MAKE IT

In the 1962 game Keres—Benko, Benko made a grave mistake 30...Bb8xg3??, and the following position was on the board (see below). Then, Keres also blundered, and Benko again made a mistake. Finally, Keres still won the game.

Can you win the position after 30...Bxg3??

Keres - Benko 1962. White to move.

If you are not a grandmaster, you may expect that if you do not move the pieces on the board and if you try to spend only 10 minutes on the solution, you will fail somewhere. 

Thus, relax and take it as a correspondence chess position: PUZZLE.

On Chesstempo's tactics section, this puzzle has the number 143468. 

A HINT: After the obvious 31 Qxg3! consider the replies 31...Qd5 and 31...Qe4.

In the present post, the Apronus chess software was used.

STUPID TACTICS TRAINING

I found such a solution from the Chessbase's Playchess, Tactics Training: 1...Rg3+!!

White to move

Playchess's Tactics Training (similar to Chess24's, for example)—I seriously dislike such a fever.

They are trying to train you to be a superficial robot. 

Some stupid psychologists probably invented such a system.

Instead, I recommend using, for example, Chesstempo's tactics training. It trains you to calculate difficult, complicated positions and see nuances. 

On Chesstempo, you have to start by understanding the material balance of the position and its structure. It is important to know if you are a pawn down, etc., because the rightness of the solution depends on the final material balance.

I have received a rating above 2400 on such training systems. True, I often had to waste 30 minutes to find the right solution.

Let's return to Playchess's system. My tactics rating there is below 1800, and I will probably not use that system anymore.

Often, they give only 30 seconds to "solve" the problem.

Often, I have made the "right move" without having time to understand whether the final position's material balance and structure are good enough. After the "successful" solution, a new problem is immediately presented, while your brain is dissatisfied and still wondering whether the "right" solution was indeed right.

Often, I have lost time because I am still counting the dissipated pawns and exchanges.

Obviously, they are training you to be a blitz-idiot.

In a real game, the player remembers how many pawns and exchanges one has sacrificed!

BREAKTHROUGH

On the platform Chess Mail, where the chess engines are prohibited, I had white pieces against Telemaque in correspondence chess. I thought I had a winning position but could not break through. The opposite-coloured bishops were on the board, and my opponent had built a fortress. 

Making the move 1 Ra5-a1, I gave up my hopes of breaking through on the queenside by making some sacrifices.

I was ready to offer a draw if my opponent plays 1...Kf5-e6.

Suddenly, my opponent made a grave mistake 1...Kf5-g4??

It is White to move and win. 

And do not say you will win if you make the second-best move in that position. Whatever the chess engines are telling you.

White to move and win

In the present post, the Apronus chess software was used.

YOUR STRONGEST POINT MIGHT BE WEAK

Black to Move

My opponent on Playchess did not do it.

Check your solution on Apronus:

BLACK WON IN 23 MOVES - TWO KNIGHTS DEFENCE

In the Two Knights Defence, the variation 4 Ng5 is very sharp. White wins a pawn, but Black gets the initiative. The slightest mistake can cost a game for White.

I had black pieces in the game Krasotkin - Nanomaser on the platform ChessOK, 15 minutes per game. The game lasted only 23 moves.

Krasotkin - Nanomaster, ChessOK, 2024

You can analyze the game here:

Some comments on this game

Position after 10...Bd6

After 10...Bd6, 11 Nc4? was a mistake. White lost time to exchange one's centralized knight for Black's knight on the board's edge.

The correct moves were 11 d4 or 11 f4, defending the knight on e5. 

For example, after 11 d4 exd4 12 Nxd3, White's knight is close to White's king, while Black's knight is still on the edge. The disturbing central pawn on e4 has been exchanged. White's queen on d1 and bishop on c1 have gained some space.

The move 13 0-0?? was a final mistake. The correct move was 13 d4, after which White still has a bad position.

After 13 0-0??, Black has a winning combination. 

Position after 13 0-0

This combination is typical. First, Black sacrifices the bishop on h2: 13...Bxh2+. Then, Black plays 14...Ng4+. Then, depending on circumstances, Black plays 15...Qh4, 15...Qg5 or 15...Qd6.

Note that in the diagram above, White's queenside is entirely undeveloped. 

Worse, White's bishop on c4 also does not participate in the battle that will start around White's king. That bishop does not protect the crucial square g4 and, thus, does not deter the threatening move Nf6-g4.

With the move 12 Be2xc4, White's bishop abandoned the square e2 and landed on a seemingly more active position on c4. Unfortunately, the bishop on c4 alone does not threaten the well-defended pawn on f7.

White's position would be bad but much better than in the game if, on the diagram above, White's bishop would be on e2 instead of c4, as shown in the diagram below:

The position from above, if the bishop on c4 is on e2 instead

In the present post, the Apronus chess software was used.

BLACK WON IN THE TWO KNIGHTS DEFENCE

I had black pieces in the game on the platform ChessOK. Time control 15 minutes per game. The game

vugar79 - Nanomaster (0-1)

lasted only 17 moves:

vugar79 - Nanomaster, 2024

Some comments on this game

After the game move 9...Be6, the following theoretical position is on the board:

The game move 10 Neg5 grabs back the pawn, but it is a loss of time. 

Better is 10 Bg5, continuing the development and hindering Black from castling to the queenside. After 10...h6?, there is a tactical reply 11 Bf6!

After the game move 12...Bd6, the following position is on the board:

Black threatens with the combination 13...Bxh2+ 14. Nxh2 Qxd1. 

Unfortunately, White had to play 13 Qd3. 

After the game continuation 13 Bg5?, the following position is on the board:

White's bishop on g5 is hanging. The knight on f3 is overloaded. In the game Bohm - Reshevsky (Amsterdam 1977), Black used it to play 13...Bxh2+! 

However, when grabbing the pawn on e6, White managed to open the f-file for Black's rooks.

In the present game, and in the game De Abreu - Harshavardhan (Chess.com INT 2020), Black used the half-open f-file to attack with 13...Rdf8!

In the present post, the Apronus chess software was used.

WHITE TO MOVE

On the ICC (Internet Chess Club), there was an interesting game Nanomaster - PaulMuadDib. 

I had the white pieces and managed to win with an impressive combination.

White to move

The full game can be seen here. 

WHITE TO MOVE

White to move

Check your solution on Apronus.

THE GAME LASTED ONLY 10 MOVES

Gegonz - Nanomaster 
Chess-mail, 2023-2024

I had black pieces.

It is not a fork

If Black takes the knight a5, then White takes the knight d2.

If 10...Bxa5, then 11 Kxd2.

The position after 10...Ne4!

After the move 10...Ne4!, two White's pieces are attacked at once.

However, this is not a fork because two Black's pieces are involved in the combination.

Such a combinatorial motif seems common in chess but has not received due attention. Such a tactical motif does not even have a name (or well-known name).

Yes, it is zwischenzug.

However, here, it is a particular kind of zwischenzug. Zwischenzug is used here to defend against the opponent's threat and create a new threat - so that, in sum, two threats against the opponent will appear on the chessboard.

And no, it is not the roentgen motif.

In the case of the roentgen motif, two opponent's pieces are suddenly attacked after one move, while the attacker's two pieces are involved. However, in our example, one of the opponent's pieces was under attack from the very beginning.

Thus, it is neither a fork nor a roentgen. And it is too general to say that it is a zwischenzug merely. But after one move, two opponent's pieces are simultaneously under attack, similarly to a fork or a roentgen.