Atlas Chess Tournament '21 (Final Scores) (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 29, 2024, 05:55:57 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Forum Community
  Forum Community (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, YE, KoopaDaQuick 🇵🇸)
  Atlas Chess Tournament '21 (Final Scores) (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Atlas Chess Tournament '21 (Final Scores)  (Read 9675 times)
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,206
India


« on: August 15, 2021, 02:59:59 PM »

Minionofmidas won our game after I resigned. It was quite thrilling, even if disappointing. As I understand, I’m not out yet, right?


Insane match. Surprised by a (reputedly weak but playable) opening variant I'd never heard of, effectively won the game in a period we both played at rapid speed, then fell asleep at the wheel, almost got caught in a mate trap and pissed my material lead away entirely before getting lucky in the endgame.
I also like that my next check wd fork his rook if it weren't also mate!

(I posted that over at aad, thought it only fair to put it here as well)
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,206
India


« Reply #1 on: September 20, 2021, 08:51:06 AM »

My game against Ebowed has concluded. https://www.chess.com/analysis/game/daily/355226703?tab=report
Looked fairly even for a long while until some gaps opened. I note chess.com finds no blunder by him (or me) in the game.
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,206
India


« Reply #2 on: September 20, 2021, 01:56:19 PM »

My game against Ebowed has concluded. https://www.chess.com/analysis/game/daily/355226703?tab=report
Looked fairly even for a long while until some gaps opened. I note chess.com finds no blunder by him (or me) in the game.



gg to both players. I took a peek once in a while as it progressed, it did look like a very even game. Ebowed seemed to have the upper hand with the rook and queen staring at the black king after 22. Rxh4. Black fought back to take control with a rook battery on 26... Rag8.
Although the real breakthrough was 32...De8. From that point on - and I was hoping for that continuation when I played 30... Sf5, so maybe the real losing move was the long castling? - I knew  I was winning.
Quote
After 35 Kd3 I was hoping to see if black would go 35... Qb1+ with a bunch of nice mating threats:

36. Ke3 Re8+ 37. Qe4 Qxe4#
36. Rc2 Rxe2 37. Qxe2 Rg3+ 38. Kd2 Ne4+ 39. Qxe4 fxe4 and mate in a few moves
36. Rc2 Rxe2 37. Kxe2 Qxc2+ 38. Kf1 Qc1+ 39. Ke2 Rg1 or 39. Kf2 Ne4+ and again mate in a few moves
Huh, I remember the first sequence and the first 3 moves of the second from the analysis box. I think I focussed on 36. Rc2 Rxe2 37. Kxe2 Re8+ and didn't find a good continuation to that.
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,206
India


« Reply #3 on: November 10, 2021, 10:47:36 AM »


I really enjoyed watching your game. There was a lot of back and forth with good moves one both sides. I think it came down to 24 ... Bxh4, where black had the choice of the h-pawn or the passed c-pawn. The passed pawn was too dangerous and became the deciding factor.
I was quite surprised by that - taking the h pawn was kind of pointless to the point where I hadn't given it any thought, and as it turned out the rook never got back into the action again after 25.
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,206
India


« Reply #4 on: November 10, 2021, 02:19:35 PM »

I didn't see 25... Nb3 after 25. Rxe7, which is why I didn't take the c pawn.
I did see that but figured it didn't really matter since the bishop is covered and I can then cover one rook with the other.
I think I did not see that after 26 Rcc7 (or Rec7) Nxc7 (or Nxe7) your rook is also staring down at my poor bishop. You probably win after that.
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,206
India


« Reply #5 on: November 30, 2021, 03:07:11 AM »

"Count-Y only accepts challenges from players rated higher than 1691" so you'll have to challenge me.
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,206
India


« Reply #6 on: December 13, 2021, 12:01:21 AM »

https://www.chess.com/game/daily/370365299

I gave it my best shot. It was predictably not enough.

( also only just now noticed you wrote sthg in the chat around move 16. Heh.)
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,206
India


« Reply #7 on: January 26, 2022, 11:20:54 PM »

Challenge issued.
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,206
India


« Reply #8 on: January 29, 2022, 02:28:45 AM »

parts of it were played essentially as a blitz game. With the difference that we could adjourn for the night in between, which rather raises the attractivity of the blitz option. I'm all for oneday matches; would probably mean far fewer mid-tournament resignations.
But presumably you have to issue the challenge, on account of the ratings difference?

As to the game itself... whoever called this opening pianissimo had a pretty sick sense of humor.
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,206
India


« Reply #9 on: March 28, 2022, 01:05:09 PM »

Congrats to mimoha on winning the game between us, and thanks for his patience in dealing with my slowness in moving

gg to both. I have heard of the Fried Liver Attack, but this is the first time I'd seen it in a real game. It's one of the older known openings, first described over 400 years ago.


I've never heard it referred to by that or any other name or seen that sequence in any book, but I've played it over the board vs a friend as both white and black!
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,206
India


« Reply #10 on: March 29, 2022, 01:23:02 AM »

Congrats to mimoha on winning the game between us, and thanks for his patience in dealing with my slowness in moving

gg to both. I have heard of the Fried Liver Attack, but this is the first time I'd seen it in a real game. It's one of the older known openings, first described over 400 years ago.


I've never heard it referred to by that or any other name or seen that sequence in any book, but I've played it over the board vs a friend as both white and black!

It's also called the Fegatello Attack and is defined by the knight sacrifice 6. Nxf7. It was first published in the early 1600's and even has its own Wikipedia page. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fried_Liver_Attack

I think I've avoided it by not favoring the moves that lead to it. For instance, on the black side I prefer 3... Bc5 or g6 and on the white side I prefer 4. d3 to 4. Ng5.
Same thing - fegatelli are fried livers. 5... Nxd5 is a beginner's mistake (or, you know, careless friendly game mistake) and 6. d4 is an even stronger answer that I would choose in correspondence.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.039 seconds with 12 queries.