[The Chess] Debaser vs. Pinback - Teaching Style
Moderators: AArdvark, Ice Cream Jonsey
- pinback
- Posts: 17849
- Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2002 3:00 pm
- Contact:
-
- Posts: 878
- Joined: Tue Jun 25, 2002 9:55 pm
- Location: Aurora, IL
No, I'd actually rather keep the explanations. But you said you were done teaching, so I thought that meant we were going into real game mode. And since you didn't offer even the barest of commentary on Nxf4 (not that it especially needed it), that sort of confirmed my suspicions.
Ng4
While I realize I'm probably about to be on the defensive, I'm still going to try to push my guys forward, especially now that your pawn iron curtain has begun to deteriorate at least a tad. I can kind of see the rudiments of an assault forming, provided you don't have me on the run constantly from here on out.
Ng4
While I realize I'm probably about to be on the defensive, I'm still going to try to push my guys forward, especially now that your pawn iron curtain has begun to deteriorate at least a tad. I can kind of see the rudiments of an assault forming, provided you don't have me on the run constantly from here on out.
- pinback
- Posts: 17849
- Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2002 3:00 pm
- Contact:
"I'm afraid you can't do that, Dave." - HAL 9000.Debaser wrote:Ng4
Hasn't my rook got your knight pinned?
(And anyhow, wouldn't it be "Nxg4", taking the pawn, if indeed you were allowed to do so?)
I'll go on explaining moves all night. The problem is, the further away we get from "1. e4", the less I know, and the more I'm afraid of doing genuine damage to an upstart's chess thinking. I'd hate to harm you in such a way.
-
- Posts: 878
- Joined: Tue Jun 25, 2002 9:55 pm
- Location: Aurora, IL
Ah. Right on all counts, though I did know I was taking the pawn (forgot to annotate it properly).
Qe4.
I'm not sure if this really helps anything or not. I'm harrassing the queenside rook, who's protected by your queen anyway, and allowing my queen to be harrassed by your knight should you choose to go that route. But at least she's in a slightly better position to protext the king should that prove necessary.
Qe4.
I'm not sure if this really helps anything or not. I'm harrassing the queenside rook, who's protected by your queen anyway, and allowing my queen to be harrassed by your knight should you choose to go that route. But at least she's in a slightly better position to protext the king should that prove necessary.
- pinback
- Posts: 17849
- Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2002 3:00 pm
- Contact:
- pinback
- Posts: 17849
- Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2002 3:00 pm
- Contact:
Ah! Then ...Kh8.
Gettin' the old boy squared away over there!
Notice, that if you were in a trading mood, instead of Qd5+, you could have gone Qxf4...exf4 Rxe8...Rxe8, trading a queen and a rook for a queen and a rook.
That would not have served your purposes, though, in this case, as explained previously.
Gettin' the old boy squared away over there!
Notice, that if you were in a trading mood, instead of Qd5+, you could have gone Qxf4...exf4 Rxe8...Rxe8, trading a queen and a rook for a queen and a rook.
That would not have served your purposes, though, in this case, as explained previously.
Last edited by pinback on Sat Jul 10, 2004 1:56 am, edited 1 time in total.
- pinback
- Posts: 17849
- Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2002 3:00 pm
- Contact:
-
- Posts: 878
- Joined: Tue Jun 25, 2002 9:55 pm
- Location: Aurora, IL
- pinback
- Posts: 17849
- Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2002 3:00 pm
- Contact:
- pinback
- Posts: 17849
- Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2002 3:00 pm
- Contact:
Look again. You can essentially win the game on your next move, and it ain't Qe3. This is a teaching game. What I'm trying to teach you here is, 1) I suck, and 2) if someone blunders, pounce on 'em.
One more try.
(BTW: My blunder was genuine. I didn't do it to "show you something". I really am that bad.)
(BTW2: "Qe3" isn't even a valid move. You may be better at chess, but I'm still better at notation.)
One more try.
(BTW: My blunder was genuine. I didn't do it to "show you something". I really am that bad.)
(BTW2: "Qe3" isn't even a valid move. You may be better at chess, but I'm still better at notation.)
-
- Posts: 878
- Joined: Tue Jun 25, 2002 9:55 pm
- Location: Aurora, IL
Er... no I'm not. I really don't see the move you mean...pinback wrote:(BTW2: "Qe3" isn't even a valid move. You may be better at chess, but I'm still better at notation.)
Nor, in retrospect do I see how Qf7 was supposed to prompt a Queen trade...
II've checked the board like four times now both for errors and for what the hell you're talking about. This is depressing.
Humiliated in my moment of triumph!!
- pinback
- Posts: 17849
- Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2002 3:00 pm
- Contact:
-
- Posts: 878
- Joined: Tue Jun 25, 2002 9:55 pm
- Location: Aurora, IL
Oh, right right right. f 7. I had her in lik three different spots and not one of them was right. You are much better at notation.pinback wrote:Your Queen is at d5 (see above: "Qd5+"). I moved mine to f7. They're staring at each other, all catty-like. You know how women are.
Like this:
So, anyway, yeah. Qxa8+.
Though that's still not going to get me mate in the next couple moves, unless you make another error.
- pinback
- Posts: 17849
- Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2002 3:00 pm
- Contact: