^ Click here to remove ads! ^

Getting Too Scared

« Blogs home
Submitted by philidor_position on Sat, 09/05/2009 at 9:31am.

Hey folks, here's the analysis of my last game on FICS. I was lucky enough to win this one due to a blunder of my opponent, but I must say I played a really weak game this time. I think the title applies very well to this game, because I've shown psychological weaknesses mixed up with some simple oversights (usually it's only one of the two) and got myself into trouble for getting too scared where I should not be, and not being able to see some real threats in time.

Here's the game again, heavily analyzed. I'll point out the most important positions in separate diagrams.

 

I'll sum up some key ideas from the game:

1) Don't get too scared based on strict positional "rules" without actually trying to evaluate the resulting position. 

Here in this position reached after black's 9...Nc6, I was too worried about 10...Nb4 hitting on my bishop on d3 that I played the inaccuracy 10.a3? very quickly.


It's because I felt threatened from a knight so close in my territory on b4, and I really liked my bishop there on d3, I have always thought it was the best square for the light square bishop. Well as much as that could be true, it's not something to hold on to at all costs. I didn't want to move it anywhere. However, objective analysis shows that after 10.h3 Nb4 11.Be2, actually that knight on b4 will become a liability for black there, because it will allow a later Qb3 to come with precious tempo.

The threat of 10...Nh5 though was real, and demanded much more attention from white. Now that I saw, but I miscalculated the line with 11.Ne2, missing black could play 11...Bg4.

 

So let's look at that position now, after 10...Nh5:

I had missed the 11.Ne2 Bg4 idea when I played 10.a3?, but when I saw the position in the diagram, I did see it.
 
So I was facing a decision, should I play 11.Ne2 and hope I could walk through the complications clean as I did in the game, or play 11.Be5?

Well, it's true that 11.Be5 allows 11...Nxe5 12.Nxe5 Bxe5 13.dxe5, doubling up my central pawns, but how is black going to take advantage of that?

In one of my previous blogs, I had talked about the idea "weaknesses that cannot be taken advantage of aren't really weaknesses," and that applies here perfectly.

Here white is perfectly fine, the d pawn is very hard to attack, and actually keeps the knight on h7 out of play. For specific lines, you can go back to the game window and walk through the variations.

One final note:

I have discovered the fact that the calculation exercise you get from analyzing difficult tactical puzzles don't necessarily help in all in-game scenarios. Making even simple decisions can require the calculation of a lot of lines, and the thing is, they aren't always forced. So you don't have that big hint of "finding the forced win."

I think the only way to hone those in-game calculation abilities (the part that is not covered by tactical studies) is to play games frequently. 

So that's it, I would appreciate comments & questions. See you next game!

» posted in philidor_position's Chess Analysis Blog
| 321 reads | 2 comments
 

Comments:

by philidor_position - 4 months ago
international International
Member Since: May 2009
Member Points: 1086

Hi hicetnunc, thanks for the comment. Well maybe it wasn't a game losing mistake, but it has a strong background, mentioned in the title: I tend to obsess over slight weaknesses when I notice them, and close my eyes to any other thing. And many times they weren't even real weaknesses.

Thanks for the tips on how to study calculation, I pretty much know everything about it, but at the moment it's just a matter of having enough time on my hands.

I've checked out the analysis group, but I didn't like the idea of analyzing games for just one group, when I can post it on my blog. These take a lot of effort, and I'd like to share them with as many people as possible.

Thanks again and have a great chess!

by hicetnunc - 5 months ago
Neuilly-sur-Seine France
Member Since: Aug 2007
Member Points: 3682

Excellent analysis and excellent approach to game analysis !

I think you're a bit harsh with yourself regarding the a3 move in the game : knowing that Nh5 is more problematic than Nb4 is this position is also a question of experience : now you know it and you'll know it for ever, but it's not a major mistake.

Concerning your remark on calculations, I think you highlight a good point : most tactical exercises emphasize what I call 'initiative calculations ' : meaning you know you have an advantage and you have to find a way to make it even greater (winning attack, material gain), while in games, you often have to face what I call 'control calculations ' - ie. making sure that by choosing a given path, you don't offer tactical opportunities to your opponent. To work on these, you can try various exercises :

  • studies could help, as they require upmost accuracy, and you have to take into account your opponents reply,
  • working on endgame positions is a good exercise too, as you have to take into account your opponent's reply and counterplay is often what he will strive for,
  • and, as you rightly say, playing standard games, or analyzing them, also helps tremendously - to help your calculation process, you may try and ask yourself : what is the most disruptive move my opponent could try to play in this variation ? does it work ?

And last but not least, as you seem to enjoy game analysis, you may be interested to have a look at the Analysis Group , a chess.com group devoted to this exercise... Smile

 
^ Back to top

Add your comment:

Join Chess.com for free to add your comment! Already a member? Then login now to comment.