What should I have done better? Are there any key points in this game where I missed something positional the computer can't tell me?
http://en.lichess.org/ivDbF6P3
http://en.lichess.org/ivDbF6P3
5. Bf4, 16. Qf3 and not queening the g pawn in the endgame were the main mistakes. Now in the middlegame it seems White struggled to find a good plan and this led to many trades which as usual in this structure are in Black's favour and ultimately a switch in the trend of the game from slightly better to clearly worse.
This type of Slav/Caro-Kann is not easy at all to handle from the white side since there is no clear way to improve the position. White should be patient and careful, develop and improve the pieces as much as possible, grab space in the center without over-extending and allowing a free break, and use all the small advantages to create weaknesses wherever possible. There are other plans like e3-e4-e5 Ne4-d6 which become favourable when correctly prepared.
It's easier to play this type of position when you have the two bishops because simplifications and breakthroughs in the center are less to be feared, so maybe Bxd6 wasn't the most ambitious move too.
This type of Slav/Caro-Kann is not easy at all to handle from the white side since there is no clear way to improve the position. White should be patient and careful, develop and improve the pieces as much as possible, grab space in the center without over-extending and allowing a free break, and use all the small advantages to create weaknesses wherever possible. There are other plans like e3-e4-e5 Ne4-d6 which become favourable when correctly prepared.
It's easier to play this type of position when you have the two bishops because simplifications and breakthroughs in the center are less to be feared, so maybe Bxd6 wasn't the most ambitious move too.
my thoughts:
it's not so much a queen's gambit accepted as a slav, as black plays c6 on move 3. (the gqa move would be c5) minor point but still
the Bf4 move seems strange, you should wait with this piece, it's better on g5, e3, b2 or even d2 in case of pawn to e3. when black has played his own bishop to f5 you may take the opportunity to play e4, although e3 is ifc fine
first priority in these kinds of positions is often to restrict black's own pawn play, especially the breaks e5 and c5, if you can do that you are basically eternally better. (as long as you keep pieces on the board)
black's position is solid and it is often difficult to form a plan based on piece play alone. therefore a pawn break/push of your own is in place:
d5 is the most ambitious idea for white, breaking open the center to be able to use white's more active position, doesn't always work though
e4-e5 followed by kingside pressure (always a good idea if black has pieces on d6 and f6)
try to get some initiative with your knights on the queenside.
good luck with 1 d4
it's not so much a queen's gambit accepted as a slav, as black plays c6 on move 3. (the gqa move would be c5) minor point but still
the Bf4 move seems strange, you should wait with this piece, it's better on g5, e3, b2 or even d2 in case of pawn to e3. when black has played his own bishop to f5 you may take the opportunity to play e4, although e3 is ifc fine
first priority in these kinds of positions is often to restrict black's own pawn play, especially the breaks e5 and c5, if you can do that you are basically eternally better. (as long as you keep pieces on the board)
black's position is solid and it is often difficult to form a plan based on piece play alone. therefore a pawn break/push of your own is in place:
d5 is the most ambitious idea for white, breaking open the center to be able to use white's more active position, doesn't always work though
e4-e5 followed by kingside pressure (always a good idea if black has pieces on d6 and f6)
try to get some initiative with your knights on the queenside.
good luck with 1 d4
Basically, you should just play 4. e4 and you are already strategically winning because you occupy the center with a gain of tempo on the bishop f5.
Thanks to both of you for your suggestions. As a new player I've been trying to completely understand one opening and all of it's variations before I branch out into other theory. People at my level seem to be unprepared for 1.d4 compared to other openings.
I think I've been misplaying by putting my dark square bishop on F4. I always thought I should accept a dark square bishop trade though because it's my worse bishop. Would anymore be able to elaborate on when to trade the bishop. Nerwal- It does make sense that I would be able to use my development advantage if I kept the bishops on like you said. I'm just curious about other situations.
I think I've been misplaying by putting my dark square bishop on F4. I always thought I should accept a dark square bishop trade though because it's my worse bishop. Would anymore be able to elaborate on when to trade the bishop. Nerwal- It does make sense that I would be able to use my development advantage if I kept the bishops on like you said. I'm just curious about other situations.
the dark squared bishop can be a bit of a hassle to know what to do with, but trying to exchange it because it is your so called Bad Bishop is most often way too abstract, your space advantage imply that you should keep pieces on the board
another important guideline is to make sure that the pieces which are left on the board have active positions. developing a bishop just to trade it off is very rarely a good idea.
the "best" position of the bishop is often g5 as it puts pressure on the center and the kingside. (black can't allow doubled pawns on the f-file, and sometimes has problems defending h7) the problem with this square is that the bishop is a target for exchanges, as in the Lasker defence of the queen's gambit declined.
the f4 square is sort of good in many lines, as it puts pressure on the queenside (c7, b8 squares) and leaves the g5 square for other pieces/pawns. however black will often just trade this off unless doing so loses time. you very rarely see the bishop on f4 in the Slav.
don't be afraid of blocking in your bishop with e3.
on the subject of exchanging developed pieces, i thought i had written this in my last post but somehow i forgot: it takes you over 20 moves to move a rook, instead you go for an exchange of your already developed knight with Qf3, Ne4
a good normal setup is Qe2, Rfd1, Rac1 and the black queen feels unsafe on the d-line. just centralize your stuff and all will be well. :)
another important guideline is to make sure that the pieces which are left on the board have active positions. developing a bishop just to trade it off is very rarely a good idea.
the "best" position of the bishop is often g5 as it puts pressure on the center and the kingside. (black can't allow doubled pawns on the f-file, and sometimes has problems defending h7) the problem with this square is that the bishop is a target for exchanges, as in the Lasker defence of the queen's gambit declined.
the f4 square is sort of good in many lines, as it puts pressure on the queenside (c7, b8 squares) and leaves the g5 square for other pieces/pawns. however black will often just trade this off unless doing so loses time. you very rarely see the bishop on f4 in the Slav.
don't be afraid of blocking in your bishop with e3.
on the subject of exchanging developed pieces, i thought i had written this in my last post but somehow i forgot: it takes you over 20 moves to move a rook, instead you go for an exchange of your already developed knight with Qf3, Ne4
a good normal setup is Qe2, Rfd1, Rac1 and the black queen feels unsafe on the d-line. just centralize your stuff and all will be well. :)
"I always thought I should accept a dark square bishop trade though because it's my worse bishop. Would anymore be able to elaborate on when to trade the bishop."
When judging a position usually several positional factors are fighting each other, it's not possible to make the right decision by taking only one factor into account. A concrete assessment has to be made, that means deciding which factor is the most important in the given situation.
Here the Bf4 is the bad bishop in view of the d4-e3 center, but there are other considerations :
- White's plan might be to take the bishop pair
- a bad bishop is not that bad when developed outside the pawn chain. It is more problematic when transposing into an endgame, but then the pawn structure may also change.
- white can (and probably should) improve his position by playing e4 to gain space in the center, then there is no bad bishop to speak of.
- white holds a space advantage, and the usual recommendation is to avoid trades in this case. When lacking space it's easier to manoeuver with fewer pieces.
- however it can suddenly become a good idea to trade bishops if you have a concrete plan to exploit the weak dark squares in black's camp (sometimes c5 or e5 but more specifically d6 which can't be covered by pawns)
When judging a position usually several positional factors are fighting each other, it's not possible to make the right decision by taking only one factor into account. A concrete assessment has to be made, that means deciding which factor is the most important in the given situation.
Here the Bf4 is the bad bishop in view of the d4-e3 center, but there are other considerations :
- White's plan might be to take the bishop pair
- a bad bishop is not that bad when developed outside the pawn chain. It is more problematic when transposing into an endgame, but then the pawn structure may also change.
- white can (and probably should) improve his position by playing e4 to gain space in the center, then there is no bad bishop to speak of.
- white holds a space advantage, and the usual recommendation is to avoid trades in this case. When lacking space it's easier to manoeuver with fewer pieces.
- however it can suddenly become a good idea to trade bishops if you have a concrete plan to exploit the weak dark squares in black's camp (sometimes c5 or e5 but more specifically d6 which can't be covered by pawns)
yeah normally i avoid the complications into which you entered by playing 1.g4
its a fairly solid system, with little theory needing to be known. usually you want to advance your f-pawn shortly afterward. im not kidding about that either.
its a fairly solid system, with little theory needing to be known. usually you want to advance your f-pawn shortly afterward. im not kidding about that either.
no puc conecar amb calichess.org
Your main problem was tactical (13. Qf3!? and 16. Qf3?). Didn't you see g4 coming?
Strategically speaking, you were not forced to play 11. Nxg6. You could wait for him to castle. You gave him the attack with 11. Nxg6. You could have played 11. a4. Because Black didn't castled yet, he cannot play b5 (Rooks aren't connected), so you will probably play a5.
On the dark-squared Bishop, see some GM games to learn how they handle it.
Strategically speaking, you were not forced to play 11. Nxg6. You could wait for him to castle. You gave him the attack with 11. Nxg6. You could have played 11. a4. Because Black didn't castled yet, he cannot play b5 (Rooks aren't connected), so you will probably play a5.
On the dark-squared Bishop, see some GM games to learn how they handle it.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.