Diary of a Patzer

Valmont

I squandered a strong attack tonight on two occasions and was lucky to scrape with a draw. My king-hunting skills need work and I need to learn some composure. I usually spend most games panicking unnecessarily.

namenotavailablE

On your 16th move, Nf4 (instead of Rad1) looks interesting. The threat is Ng6 (exploiting the pin on f7) as well as generally having the possibility of getting another piece in the direction of Black's king side with Nh5.

Valmont

That was the time to play it all right. I saw the possibilities but after his bishop was on b7 x-raying my queen the effect was blunted somewhat.

Valmont

I had two games as black this week, one against an 1800 who smashed me into little pieces. Then I played a league game against a fellow 1410 which was possibly the most interesting game I've played. I created a very complex position (well to me and my opponent's eyes at any rate) that caused us to use quite a lot of time and after I edged ahead with a strong position I eventually won a piece and traded into the end game which would have been an easy conversion, even for me. With this win, we have strengthened our position as number 1 in the division and if our last four games go the same way we will be playing in division 2 next season and every game I post here is destined to be a loss.

Lucena

Valmont wrote: »

I had two games as black this week, one against an 1800 who smashed me into little pieces. Then I played a league game against a fellow 1410 which was possibly the most interesting game I've played. I created a very complex position (well to me and my opponent's eyes at any rate) that caused us to use quite a lot of time and after I edged ahead with a strong position I eventually won a piece and traded into the end game which would have been an easy conversion, even for me. With this win, we have strengthened our position as number 1 in the division and if our last four games go the same way we will be playing in division 2 next season and every game I post here is destined to be a loss.

The 'smashed into little pieces' game: In your comments, you mention that you need to study some openings. Usually I'd advise against opening study, generally lower-rated players make mistakes elsewhere (tactics, middlegame planning, endgames...) and spending too much time on openings is wasted. However there are certain openings where general principles will only take you so far. The Morra Gambit is one of them.

Basically White gives up the pawn for rapid development. According to theory, Black is a little better, but will have to weather the tactical storm. From a practical point of view, an amateur doesn't have time to learn the Morra properly (as Black), as there are lots of other variations White can play against the Sicilian, so anything you learn against the Morra will be long forgotten by the time somebody plays it against you.

So basically avoid the Morra by not taking on c3. Here's a free rough and ready opening guide for you.

4. c3 Nf6 (if White wants to take on d4, he'll have to do it with the queen, as 5. cxd4 loses a pawn to Nxe4. So White doesn't get the centre, and you'll gain a tempo against 5. Qxd4 Nc6)

That's all you need to know! Well, maybe not, but you've got a playable position without the need to know tonnes of theory.

Lucena

The 'interesting game': Regarding the opening, the 'c3 Sicilian', you played it fine. White is just trying to hold on to the centre and find a solid position without the fireworks normally associated with the Sicilian. You can stick with the line that you played.

On move 9, I'd either have castled, or played Nf5, attacking d4 twice and also freeing up the e7 square for your bishop if you want to keep the bishop pair.

I definitely like 12... Qc7, for lots of reasons. There's no longer the discovered attack with c4, the queen is fairly secure, and White's backward c4 pawn is going to be difficult to defend.

Taking the pawn on move 21 definitely required a bit of calculation, it's not one of those moves you can play without thinking. Sometimes though you have to hurt your brain to progress in chess, or to win material. It's not all grinding out technical wins, you know, sometimes you have to get your hands dirty.:cool:

Well done on spotting the tactic on move 23! It had been in the position for a few moves, seeing as the knight could always take on d2 with check, White needed to be careful, and wasn't.

One final thing, I notice you're still taking ages to castle, as I mentioned before. Ok, in this game you weren't punished for it, but I think you'll progress more quickly as a player if you castle earlier.

Regarding chess improvement in general, and taking advice in particular, the following is worth a read:

http://streathambrixtonchess.blogspot.fr/2008/07/improve-your-chess-ii-vice-and-advice.html

Valmont

I've noticed a trend in my OTB thinking to always look for a speedy tactical win (which has yet to appear!). Consequently I think castling is just a chance for my opponent to seize the initiative early on, and I'm afraid of being crushed so I attack a bit too early. It explains moves like 12...Nf5 when 12...Qc7 was my first instinct; I think I need to trust my intuition a little bit more especially for quiet moves (18...b5 being a good a example I think).

I've gone over my games since you advised me to castle earlier and out of the twenty one I've played, I haven't castled at all 5 times, before move ten 8 times, 5 times before move 15, and twice before move 20. Those five are quite telling actually, I don't think there is even one game in Logical Chess: Move by Move where a player doesn't castle! However, I'm really thinking 'why would the Irish Tal need to castle like a coward?'.

Lucena

What you say about looking for a speedy win is interesting. I've noticed that in games against vastly stronger opposition (2000+), I'll usually play normal moves for about 10-15 moves, run out of ideas and make some random attacking gestures, partially because I've no other ideas, and partially I'd imagine because I'm afraid if I don't attack first, my opponent will. It usually ends badly! In the last couple of cases, after the game my opponent will usually say that I had a normal position and I just needed to keep developing.

In my defence, I will say it's generally in openings I don't know too well and where I'm not aware of the key ideas. Even having seen a few games in an opening can help, you get an idea of where pieces need to go, the courage to play certain pawn pushes because you've seen it done.

Regarding castling: While there are always exceptions, in general you have to castle, and so does your opponent. If you have castled and your opponent hasn't, you need to try to open the centre as quickly as possible and threaten his king. If my memory serves correctly, you did exactly this with the white pieces in a recent game.

Mustafa Chess

How is chess in Italy

Valmont

My first game in almost a month highlighted the same limitations. Curiously, my stagnation with Yusupov and his end-game puzzles has meant I have not improved at all - surprise surprise! I've been really busy with work and will continue to be so I need to find a slot for chess practice on the weekend and stick to it. I have to say, it's not much fun losing to the same player for the third time in as many months!

Any advice for me? Or have I covered my mistake in the notation?

Lucena

Mustafa Chess wrote: »

How is chess in Italy

Is that question for me or for Valmont?

If it's for me, I live in France, in an area with a fairly high level of chess activity, with plenty of Fide-rated individual and team tournaments throughout the year.

Valmont

I had a brilliant draw with white this evening against a 1700 player to whom I expected to lose badly. A draw isn't usually something to cheer about but given the fact my opponent has 300 ELO more than I do and that I was finally able to use my king and pawn endgame skills (learned very slowly and painfully from Yusupov) to salvage a draw despite being a piece down, I was very chuffed indeed. Games like this one remind me why I study chess books - they work!

mikhail

Valmont wrote: »

I had a brilliant draw with white this evening against a 1700 player to whom I expected to lose badly. A draw isn't usually something to cheer about but given the fact my opponent has 300 ELO more than I do and that I was finally able to use my king and pawn endgame skills (learned very slowly and painfully from Yusupov) to salvage a draw despite being a piece down, I was very chuffed indeed. Games like this one remind me why I study chess books - they work!

I thought you outplayed him in the opening, and look a little better after move 17 or so. I think your play got a little aimless after that. Qc7 was a blunder. Black should have no worries with the knight for the pawns.

I don't think much of how he played it after that: ...h5 and letting you exchange the knight both look very strange to me. 52...Bb3 was a mistake - simply 52...Ba6 53.Ka2 Bb5 54.Kb2 Bc4 and you're in zugzwang.

I was looking at 75.Kg5 as an alternative to what you played. 75...Ke6 is obviously inferior after 76.h5. 75...Bg4 is also rubbish - when you run the h pawn, his king is deflected, allowing Kf6 and the bishop can't defend both pawns. 75...Bd3 looks best, but you now have the g4 break, liquidating one of his pawns and leaving you with two passed pawns. It looks like a draw to me.

I wanted to check those likes with a computer, but the computer insisted 75.Kh7 was terrible for White - like -15 terrible, which seemed a lot for it to just be unable to see a fortress draw. It looks like Black just transposes back into the position after 71...Bh5. Basically, Black forces White advance the h pawn either after a Kh6 Bg6 manoeuvre or if White heads for the back rank, with ...Kg6, h5+ Kf6.

Add 71 to all of there moves to make this consistent with the game:

1.Kh6 [1.Kg8 Bg6 and all roads lead to zugzwang and ultimately to mate. 2.Kf8 (2.Kh8 Kf7 3.h5 Bxh5 4.Kh7 Bg6+ 5.Kh8 (5.Kh6 Kf6) 5...Kf8) 2...Bf7] 1...Be8 2.Kh7 Bf7 3.Kh6 [3.Kh8 Kg6 4.h5+ Kh6 and White is in zugzwang 5.e4 dxe4 6.g4 fxg4 7.f5 g3 8.f6 g2 9.d5 g1Q 10.d6 Qg8#] 3...Bg6 4.h5 Bf7 5.Kh7 Bxh5 and the computer sees mate in 19 using the now-familiar zugzwang tricks.

I should say, some 1700s would find this over the board, but it's certainly tricky, and I don't think it should take away from your result.

Valmont

mikhail wrote: »

I thought you outplayed him in the opening, and look a little better after move 17 or so. I think your play got a little aimless after that. Qc7 was a blunder. Black should have no worries with the knight for the pawns.

Thanks for the feedback. I always play aimlessly after the opening because I don't know what to do! I had a vague plan of controlling some squares on the c file but I couldn't see how to go about it.

mikhail wrote: »

52...Bb3 was a mistake - simply 52...Ba6 53.Ka2 Bb5 54.Kb2 Bc4 and you're in zugzwang.

I had a sense he could have played this sequence better too. The strange thing is my opponent beat a 2080 in the endgame last week - perhaps he was lazy because of my rating?

Mikhail wrote:

I was looking at 75.Kg5 as an alternative to what you played. 75...Ke6 is obviously inferior after 76.h5. 75...Bg4 is also rubbish - when you run the h pawn, his king is deflected, allowing Kf6 and the bishop can't defend both pawns. 75...Bd3 looks best, but you now have the g4 break, liquidating one of his pawns and leaving you with two passed pawns. It looks like a draw to me.
....

I want to look at all this analysis but I couldn't have played Kg5 on move 75 - where have you deviated from?

Thanks

mikhail

My pleasure.

Valmont wrote: »

I want to look at all this analysis but I couldn't have played Kg5 on move 75 - where have you deviated from?

I have the game from your link open, and I don't see any reason you can't play it. I'd suggest you check the link, in case there's some mistake in that copy of the game. Failing that, tell me why you think you can't play 75.Kg5

Valmont

Sorry Mikhail I see what you mean now. It seems my opponent missed not one but two wins in the end-game. First he blundered with 52...Bb3 and then after I played the innocent looking 75. Kh7 which I've seen now that it allows black to win white's h pawn. Quite an instructive end-game all things considered! My opponent maybe needs to work on forcing zugzwang considering he kept leaving me with decent king moves.

Valmont

We had our final game of the season last night and while I sat out to let another player in, we won 3-1 meaning we are the winners of the Norfolk third division! I played on board four for most of the season beginning at 76 ECF and finishing on 99 after ten wins, one loss, and two draws. Division two will be tougher next season but I think I could do with some more challenging league games. I played in a tough internal competition and my final tally was zero wins, seven losses, and two draws. I also finally completed chapter ten of Yusupov's book and went one further and finished chapter eleven on pins. Next there is another tactics chapter on double attacks which should be interesting. Even though the season is over I don't want to get rusty so I've signed up for a four-round swiss next month and this weekend I'm playing for Norfolk for the under 100ECF bracket in Cambridge. To be honest, I'm a bit disappointed with my progress this year. Overall I've completed just under half of Yusupov's book, played twenty two games, and I'm still just under the 100ECF milestone (1450 ELO). However, just before my last jump in rating I could tell a breakthrough was close and I think I'm getting there again as certain things are starting to fall into place. Patience is a big factor; I've often been my own worst enemy, ruining perfectly equal or better positions by launching a hasty attack but I think I'm slowing down now and blundering less so I just need a win against a player over 100ECF to get the ball rolling.

Valmont

I finally beat a stronger opponent today at the ECF under 100 inter-county quarter final. It was a very close affair and it took me a long time to nurse my extra pawn into a win. I made a huge blunder on move 60 by sacrificing a knight to gain a passed pawn but my opponent concurred with my assessment and declined the offer. Otherwise I think I played ok. Once again the trusty caro-kann gave me a winning pawn formation.

Valmont

I've had a bit of breakthrough (a small one really) over the last few weeks. Yusupov's chapter on double attacks recommends that a good way to spot tactics of this kind is to simply start by looking for ways to win hanging pieces. I combined this with an insight of my own that a relatively efficient way to spot tactics was to examine what squares each of my opponent's moves left unprotected or not protected as much. Lo and behold my chesstempo rating has risen by 150 points in ten days to 1750! I just need to transfer this to a few games.

Lucena

That's quite impressive! If you can maintain that level while still doing problems regularly, you should definitely see results over the board.

My own chesstempo rating tends to be around 1800, so we're actually of similar strength.

Valmont

A wild and ugly game tonight where I played what I didn't know was 'From's gambit' in response to 1. f4. I don't think this opening suited my style (if you could call it that) and I missed an awful lot of tactical opportunities during the first ten moves. I didn't anticipate my opponent gaining an extremely powerful bishop and while it constricted my position greatly he let the noose slip and blundered a piece after we had been playing for approximately three hours. He even offered the draw twice even though he was better in my opinion but I felt he was running out of ideas. Not the best game but it does boost my rating above the 100 ECF milestone! Return leg next week when I have white and I know he almost always plays the dutch (he loves it so much he opens with 1. f4 regularly) so I will prepare some lines from the Staunton gambit.

Lucena

Just had a read through the last few posts. You've gone from 67 ECF to just over 100 ECF. That's huge progress! Do you feel stronger as a player?

Regarding your From's Gambit game, did you know the theory going into the game, or did you wing it? It's not something I'd play without some knowledge, it's just too wild! I think your opponent had a better option on move 11. Instead of Kf2, he could've played Qe2, offering to swap queens. If you play 11...Bf5, he can just castle, and if you swap queens, his position is ok.

On your 15th move, you could have tried Ne7, blocking out the white bishop on g5, and you can now castle long, with a decent advantage in development. Still, other than that, you played well, and a win is a win!

Congratulations again on your progress!

Valmont

Lucena wrote: »

Just had a read through the last few posts. You've gone from 67 ECF to just over 100 ECF. That's huge progress! Do you feel stronger as a player?

Yes, looking back I was in dire need of patience. I'm playing a lot more cautiously (still not enough though) and I credit Yusupov's bloody painful exercises (I'm on chapter 13 now) with improving my calculation which means fewer blunders.

Lucena wrote: »

Regarding your From's Gambit game, did you know the theory going into the game, or did you wing it?

My opponent previously beat me with 1.f4 where he gained a huge advantage out of the opening. I picked the gambit precisely because it was wild and I thought I could make him uncomfortable. He 'deviated' from the main 5...g5 lines on move six so I figured that put us even. It was a double-edged strategy no doubt but it's almost the end of the season and I was feeling a bit more confident with open positions.

Valmont

I decided to mess up my opponent's attempt to pay the Queen's gambit last night by playing the wild budapest gambit. I don't think he had encountered it before because I won the pawn back very easily. While my opponent blundered a bishop towards the end, I felt my timely rook lift to e5 allowed me to basically dominate the board and build up a large attack on the kingside. I played it even though I could swear there's some general rule about not playing the rooks up into the middle of the board before the end-game?

mikhail

That's a nice, direct attack with Black.

Giving the pawn back quickly can be a reasonable way to handle the Budapest. Black hasn't traded a flank pawn for a central one, so there's no long term strategic gain, and he's spent three moves getting that knight to e5. White can wind up with good development and control of the center for very little in return. That said, 5.e3 doesn't seem to be the best way of doing it, and he was far too quick to trade pieces throughout the game.

For alternatives to ...Bb4+, it'd have been happy enough on e7 (maybe going to f6), but I'd drawn to the idea of putting it on d6. After you fianchetto the other bishop, the two of them will rake the kingside.

Valmont

I was outgraded by 200 ELO points (27 ECF) last night in the final game of the season. It was no immortal but a nice tactic won the exchange and I barely held it together to win the endgame with checkmate with just twenty seconds left on the clock!

Lucena

Congrats on a win in your final game. You seemed to be stronger than your opponent. Don't know if you're taking a break over the summer, but if not, maybe work on tactics. It's useful for players of all levels, and maybe you'll have an edge when the new season starts.

By the way, where are you up to with Yusupov?

Valmont

Sadly still on chapter 13 with Yusupov. I would make excuses but I've been sitting here all day playing ten minute blitz games on chess.com which is not a positive thing for classical chess. I started the book late September 2014 so at this rate I won't have finished it in a year! I best get to it.

Valmont

I had my first game of the new season last Thursday at my new rating of 1487 and was paired against a 1780 who made short work of me on two occasions last season. I decided to play it safe so opted for the Budapest gambit! I was outclassed and lost on time at move 21 (!) and upon reading over the game my opponent made some very deep moves (for my calculations anyway) very quickly. At least it was educational!

I'm back reading Yusupov with a vengeance and am currently plodding miserably through chapter 14 on open files and outposts. I don't think I'll be passing this test judging by my score for the first eight puzzles. Here is one I was sure I had figured out correctly with Bh5! but of the three scoring answers mine was not mentioned. Two moves were given one point, with the correct move played by Karpov against Gligorich in 1972 being given the maximum of two points. Can you find the right move? Or more importantly, tell me why Bh5 is bad?

mikhail

Yeah, I found Karpov's move, though I didn't see the final win. A lot of Karpov problems boil down to him poking at two weaknesses at the same time. Here, the threat of invasion along the h-file along with the weakness of the c-pawn add up to Black being left a bit tied up. Two of Black's defensive moves - Qe7 and Nd7 - take pieces from the queenside, which Karpov stomps on like an empty coke can. It's really a remarkable solution.

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1067695, for the curious.

After your Bh5, what would you mean to do after ...Ke8? What have you gained?

Valmont

After Be5 Ke8, I was going to play g6 but I see now it doesn't do much except force a few trades

mikhail

He can meet g6 with ...f6, locking things up. No doubt he's still worse, but it's trickier to make progress. It's best not to push those pawns until he can't do that for tactical reasons.

Valmont

I also considered Bh5 Ke8 Bxf7+ followed up by g6+ but again not good enough! Out of the twelve puzzles on 'Open files and Outposts' I think eight of the answers were relatively simple rook lifts!

Valmont

I lost a very exciting game the other night, being unable to find the right continuation after a strong knight sacrifice. Once again I used too much time coordinating the attack and hoping for a quick finish and left myself very short for what could have been a winning end-game. How to solve these time-trouble woes? I failed chapter 14 of the Yusupov book so I'm going back over the examples again.

Valmont

I've made it to chapter 16 in the Yusupov book so I was ready to take on my opponent in the club championship who outgraded me by 105 ELO points. Last year I played the Caro-Kann in response to 1.e4 but this year I fancy my chances with the Sicilian.

I've created two tactics puzzles out of my game where I missed two pretty checkmates. 1.
2.. Solve them and then see the exciting Najdorf we played to get to the final (and third time lucky) mating position.

Lucena

I don't think I would have spotted those mates in a game either, they don't seem like the type of mate you'd see in books very often. No nice and tidy back-rankers here!

Regarding the Najdorf, have you just started playing it? My own experience of the Sicilian (Accelerated Dragon in my case) was that I wanted to play something a bit more dynamic than the French (too many Exchange Variations). Now it just seems that there are too many possibilities for White in the opening, and that in my experience, I end up playing against these more than going into a main-line Accelerated Dragon:

Closed Sicilan (from time to time)
Grand Prix Attack (only occasionally, but I deviate into a French-like structure with 2...e6 and 3...d5, which is generally ok)
Morra Gambit (fairly common)
Alapin (I get this A LOT)
Rossolimo (more over the board than on the internet)

So you may have a lot of work ahead of you. Sorry if this sounds discouraging, but I think in chess there's no such thing as a free lunch!

Valmont

I've been reading a lot of My 60 Memorable Games by Bobby Fischer and the Sicilian is the most frequently featured opening so I think I have a general intuition about the sort of position I need to work towards. My tactics have improved a lot over the last year so I'm trying to avoid closed positional games where I seem to get lost quickly. That said, I generally wince in fear lest my opponent play 2.c3 or 2.Nf3..d6 3.c3 but I've made a go of these moves before without too much trouble. Regarding the Rossolimo, the Grand Prix, or the Closed Sicilian, I know the move white plays but after that I would be firmly in Terra Incognita. I'll crack open chessbase now actually and look at a few positions.

How are you getting along? What have you been reading since finishing Yusupov?

Mustafa Chess

The Sicilian is real chess player's choice

checknraise

Mustafa Chess wrote: »

The Sicilian is real chess player's choice

You should play it more often so

Valmont

I promised myself to play a greater variety of openings this year to gain some experience. I'll probably play 1...e5 the next time I meet 1. e4. I played the King's gambit last night as white and after my 1750 rated opponent played 2. d5 I was stumped. Needless to say I knocked my king over on move ten.

Lucena

Valmont wrote: »

How are you getting along? What have you been reading since finishing Yusupov?

Decided to take a break over the summer, didn't bring any chess materials with me. I decided I'd do 30 minutes of Chesstempo exercises every day though, but unfortunately there was no internet where I went! :pac:

Been working on (very slowly) on Weteschnik's 'Understanding Chess Tactics', it seems ok, but not getting into it as much as the Yusupov. Possibly because there are lots of examples and very few exercises. Will explain a bit better when I update my own training diary.

rathkeltair

Valmont wrote: »

22... O-O-O?? A terrible move. Rd8 was much better. I was in trouble now.

Why? Surely your move 23... b5 is good, as is simply 23... Nxd3. You're huge material up, and your opponent has no threats that you cannot parry.

Valmont

What game are you referencing, Rathkeltair?

rathkeltair

Sorry, valmont, your "first win of the season"

rob51

Valmont wrote: »

I promised myself to play a greater variety of openings this year to gain some experience. I'll probably play 1...e5 the next time I meet 1. e4. I played the King's gambit last night as white and after my 1750 rated opponent played 2. d5 I was stumped. Needless to say I knocked my king over on move ten.

Falkbeer Counter Gambit if I remember rightly. I played the Kings Gambit in the Armstrong and Heidenfeld many years ago with good results for several seasons. Met one old guy who smiled and played the whole g5 line. I reckon it was main line theory in his youth :-). Otherwise most Black players didn't expect it.

Valmont

The King's gambit is the main reason I avoid 1...e5. Although I played 3...d5 line recently in a few blitz games and did won with black.

Valmont

I've been quite busy recently, mostly getting smashed by much stronger players. However I scored 3/5 in the challenger's section of the county open last week but it was nothing to write about. The stronger players beat me and I beat the weaker players: I basically performed exactly according to my ECF rating.

I had my first league game in division 2 last night, throwing away a carefully crafted advantage during an abysmal end-game but I was lucky to draw. I think my opponent realised he had blundered in offering a draw after he looked at the board a bit longer, ha!

I'm planning on playing more symmetrical openings this season like 1...e5 and 1...d5. I'm reading Reuben Fine's book The Ideas Behind the Chess Openings and I'm well prepared against most early lines in the centre game, the scotch, and the Giuoco piano, and I'll start working on the Ruy Lopez in a week or two. Someone told me the book is out of date (I have a first edition dated 1943) but I don't think the average player at 1400-1600 is too juiced up on the latest developments in the various openings.

Anyway, I'm back to bore you with another season of Patzer games!

mikhail

Valmont wrote: »

...I'm planning on playing more symmetrical openings this season like 1...e5 and 1...d5. I'm reading Reuben Fine's book The Ideas Behind the Chess Openings and I'm well prepared against most early lines in the centre game, the scotch, and the Giuoco piano, and I'll start working on the Ruy Lopez in a week or two. Someone told me the book is out of date (I have a first edition dated 1943) but I don't think the average player at 1400-1600 is too juiced up on the latest developments in the various openings.

One way in which it might mislead you is if it's overly dogmatic about controling the centre by occupying it. The hypermoderns were still gaining acceptance for their ideas back then. It's probably still worthwhile, but I'd suggest you check the recommended lines against a database, keeping any eye out for moves that have fallen completely out of fashion.

Valmont

I played a very exciting sicilian game last night as white. My opponent was rated 1513 compared to my 1472 and also the captain of the team with whom I won division three last season (I've since swapped clubs to get a chance to play in division 2) so I was glad to see him play 1...c5 to my 1. e4. My play is starting to follow a pattern whereby I build up some pressure with a small advantage and then blow it back to being worse or equal somewhere in the middlegame. In response to this terrible trend, I've purchased Ludek Pachman's Modern Chess Strategy and have recently been reading about the relative advantage of bishop vs knight. Lucky me that I had a chance to play a bishop vs knight endgame that I had never known until just this week was advantageous for white. Advice greatly encouraged as my progress seems to be stalling lately.

Valmont

This is one of my rare successful kingside attacks from a recent tournament. I think it demonstrates quite clearly the importance of playing active moves. I'll post up some of my draws and losses soon, I should learn more from them really.

EDIT: See the last post on the previous page for a very exciting sicilian dragon played last night!