online chess game

Online Chess Game

Classify and you will reveal!
Funny name, real hobbies
[ Sign up | Log in | Guest ] (beta)
odonata 34 ( +1 | -1 )
Traps in the opening Be free to post in this thread some nice traps that worked out for you in the opening. I for instance had this nice win with Black:
-> gameknot.com

Greets,
Odonata
misato 37 ( +1 | -1 )
Queen's Gambit If you play White and you know that your opponent always wants to keep the extra-pawn:
1. d4 d5 2. c4 dxc4 3. e3 b5 4. a4 c6 (4. - a6? 5. axb5 axb5 6. Rxa8) 5. axb5 cxb5? 6. Qf3 winning a rook.

(Of course, there are better (or more common) moves than 3. e3. White should not be afraid because that temporary pawn-investition - or look for another opening.)
beathoven 20 ( +1 | -1 )
It's not nescessary to fall in to this kind of traps. Just watch out for pieces putting some pressure on your pawns and block other ones to prevent they're doing the same.
typefreak 13 ( +1 | -1 )
This was a strange game, and a quick win
board #3628450
juve_leo 16 ( +1 | -1 )
Typefreak I don't mean to offend you but your opponent played very weakly. You also played pretty weakly. After Nxe4 you just play Qe2 and its an automatic win
ccmcacollister 14 ( +1 | -1 )
HMMM ... Looks like a job for BUCKLEHEAD !
Let's try to call in the Pertroff Patrol and see what's what here . . .
umpito 9 ( +1 | -1 )
Petroff juve_leo:

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Nxe5 Nxe4 4. Qe2 Qe7 5. Qxe4 d6 is probably better for white, but far from a won game.
bucklehead 156 ( +1 | -1 )
I'm with umpito here I'll throw in my two cents here, despite NOT being a Petrov expert (I just love the ugly duckling!) 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Nxe5 Nxe4 4. Qe2, the Damiano Variation, is certainly no bust to the Petrov, having been explored without much fanfare since 1512. 4... Qe7 5. Qxe4 d6 6. d4 dxe5 7. dxe5 leaves a fairly stable position; and it should be noted that the pawn at e5 is not as cramping as it might otherwise be, given that black's KN is off the board and both bishops have diagonals to run around on.

I can only guess that juve_leo is referring to the so-called "Petrov Trap," which I'm sure we all remember from elementary school:

1. e4 {Ah, the kingpawn! It's such a lovely move, which is a good thing since obviously no one ever makes a different opening move.} 1... e5 {Sweet symmetry! If the kingpawn is good for white, it's gotta be tremendous for black!} 2. Nf3 {Hmm...I wonder why they just don't set the board up this way to begin with...}2... Nf6 {Why break the pattern here? I'm doing well!} 3. Nxe5 {Yum! A tasty snack. Pawns always make for good eatin'} 3... Nxe4 {Who does that guy think he is, takin' my pawn like that? I'll show him!} 4. Qe2 {Hey, what are you doing with that knight over here?! Shoo! } 4... Nc5 {Oh man! I've really gotten myself into trouble here...I don't want to lose the knight, so I'd better move it.} 5. Nc6+
{Aha! I've been dying to use this--take that, you pawn-snatcher!}

You wanna bust the Petrov? You'd better bring more ammo than that!
spurtus 54 ( +1 | -1 )
Spurtus trap My own trap...

Scandinavian Defense : Andersen Counter Gambit : 'Spurtus Trap'...

1. e4 d5
2. exd5 Qxd5
3. Nc3 Qa5
4. d4 e5
5. dxe5 Bb4
6. Bd2 nc6
7. a3 nd4?
... can you see it?... can you take the knight and threaten the queen with the protected rook?... alarm bells should be ringing... if you see something for free theres always a catch... scroll down for answer...
...
...
...
...
8. axb4 Qxa1!
9. Qxa1 Nxc2+!!

Quite a few people I have played have fallen for this, but unfortunatley the Andersen Counter Gambit has be deprecated.

Hopefully got all the moves right, just from memory that...

Spurtus.
typefreak 20 ( +1 | -1 )
The only thing wrong in your post is the line "can you take the knight and threaten the queen"
You can't take the knight, but take the bisschop, and threathen the queen with both a rook and a pawn.
ccmcacollister 7 ( +1 | -1 )
here's a shorty ... 1.e4 e5 2.d4 Nc6 3.d5 Nd4? 4.c3
Has about 3 dozen blitz scalps ... the joy of playing the Center Game :)
fmgaijin 54 ( +1 | -1 )
Variation on the QGA Trap Here's an amusing line from the Grunfeld. I once faced an opponent (1900 JCA OTB player) in a pre-event blitz event who fell into this trap. Later, I played him in the main event and he fell into the trap again. Curiously, he fell into it yet again at a blitz tournament a few months later and denied emphatically that it had ever happened before when I mentioned the previous games . . . . "Those who do not learn from the past are doomed to repeat it."

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.Bg5 Ne4 5.Bh4 Nxc3 6.bxc3 dxc4 7.e3 b5? 8.a4 c6? 9.axb5 cxb5?? 10.Qf3

ccmcacollister 82 ( +1 | -1 )
a Q-trap in Fischer Attack vs Najdorf Sicilian... ktuni (1723) vs. znurk (1924) --- Sun Oct 23 2005, 14:11 GMT
Rated Blitz match, initial time: 5 minutes, increment: 2 seconds.

Move ktuni znurk
---- ---------------- ----------------
1. e4 (0:02) c5 (0:01)
2. Nf3 (0:02) d6 (0:01)
3. d4 (0:02) cxd4 (0:01)
4. Nxd4 (0:02) Nf6 (0:01)
5. Nc3 (0:01) a6 (0:01)
6. Bc4 (0:03) b5 (0:03)
Typical is 6...e6, wherein Fischer would reply with 7.Bb3, making it become the mainline response, tho other moves are playable too. Then Fischer-Tal went 7...b5
8.f4 b4 9.Na4 Nxe4 10.f5 with a strong attack favored by RJF.

7. Bb3 (0:14) b4 (0:04)
8. Nd5 (0:14) e6 (0:03)
9. Ba4+ (1:07) Nbd7 ??(0:16)
Although in this game the loss of Queen is due to BL blundering here, the important aspect is to note the positioning of the WT Knights as this position can arise from different move orders or with slight variance, but still the Q gets trapped by the N's working together to cover a5,b6,c7,and d8. And e7 here as well.

10. Nc6 (0:14) exd5 (0:29)
11. Nxd8 (0:09) Kxd8 (0:01)
12. exd5 (0:09) Bb7 (0:06)
13. Bg5 (0:32) Be7 (0:01)
14. Bc6 (0:11) Bxc6 (0:18)
15. dxc6 (0:06) Ne5 (0:04)
16. Bxf6 (0:07) Bxf6 (0:09)
17. Qxd6+ (0:04) Ke8 (0:08)
18. c7 (0:46) Nd7 (0:05)
19. O-O-O (0:08) Ne5 (0:19)
20. Rhe1 (0:10)
{Black resigned} 1-0

wolstoncroft1 32 ( +1 | -1 )
Kings gambit trap here is a trap i saw in the Kings gambit. I have had it work many times. However if your opponent does not take the bait of the check at h4 then you have a kings gambit which in theory is dead.
e4 e5
f4 exf
Bc4 Qh4+
Kh1 Nf6
Nf3 Qg4
Bxf7+ Kd8
Nc3 and you can see the queen has no where to go and after Ne2 by white next move the queen will fall.
ccmcacollister 54 ( +1 | -1 )
Danish or Goring Gambit transpositionally. A twist on a more common Bxf7+ type trap wherein here Ba3+ is also required, available, and Queen winning ... }8-)
***
tempusfugit (1775) vs. walhalla (1833) --- Wed Nov 2 2005, 11:24 GMT
Rated Blitz match, initial time: 1 minutes, increment: 3 seconds.

Move tempusfugit walhalla
---- ---------------- ----------------
1. e4 (0:06) e5 (0:02)
2. d4 (0:01) exd4 (0:01)
3. c3 (0:01) dxc3 (0:01)
4. Nf3 (0:03) cxb2 (0:01)
5. Bxb2 (0:02) d6 (0:01)
6. Bc4 (0:03) Nf6 (0:04)
7. O-O (0:05) h6 (0:01)
8. e5 (0:06) dxe5 (0:06)
9. Bxf7+ (0:03) Ke7 (0:03)
10. Ba3+ (0:04) Kxf7 (0:41)
11. Qxd8 (0:02) Bg4 (0:13)
12. Nxe5+ (0:02)
{Black resigned} 1-0
(And -I- escaped by the skin of my teeth since my computer disconnected before I even got to see he resigned! WHO says there's no Luck in Chess ??!)
brunetti 22 ( +1 | -1 )
wolstoncroft1 3...Qh4+ is a perfectly sound move;
not playing it doesn't give White a theoretically dead game;
in your line, Black plays bad moves like the losing 5...Qg4 (5...Qh6 is far better) and 4...Nf6 (when 4...c6 is perfectly safe).

Alex
wolstoncroft1 56 ( +1 | -1 )
brunetti thanks for clarifying, i didnt think the thread was traps that occur with perfect play, siply traps, because with perfest play no traps would occur.... so pointing out that black made some bad moves was really necessary.
As fas as the theory... any chess authority would agree that at the highest levels of chess the Kings Gambit is unsound. Many chess stars are quoted as saying so, fischerfor one. If black opts he can hold onto the estra pawn. Thats the theory.. Thanks for chiming in
erdite 9 ( +1 | -1 )
You might like this one I just won this game today:
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 f6
3. Bc4 Nh6
4. d4 exd4
5. Nxd4 c5
6. Bxh6 gxh6
7. Qh5+ Ke7
8. Nf5 Checkmate
brunetti 57 ( +1 | -1 )
wolstoncroft1 "any chess authority would agree that at the highest levels of chess the Kings Gambit is unsound. Many chess stars are quoted as saying so, fischerfor one. If black opts he can hold onto the estra pawn. Thats the theory.. "

I'm sorry but that's totally false. No top player ever said that, and someone, like Short for example, sometimes plays it at the highest level. Even Fischer, who wrote an article about *a single variation* of the KG, used to play it 3 times in torurnament play, and also lost to it once.

Alex

sfinks 36 ( +1 | -1 )
King's gambit (slightly Off topic) I have to agree with brunetti. Short has played the King's Gambit at the highest level. Morozevich has played it against Kasparov, Anand, Leko,... Top GMs like Ivanchuk, Nunn, Fedorov, Adams... have played it. Spassky has beaten Fischer, Karpov, Bronstein etc. with it...
neonliteone 17 ( +1 | -1 )
This is probably a well known trap...

I'll post it anyway :-)

-> gameknot.com
wolstoncroft1 224 ( +1 | -1 )
just to clarify, I play the Kings gambit and I like it as an opening.....but to defend my point and to those who disagree with it here are some sites that back up my point that the Kings Gambit is widely reguarded as unsound.

-> www.chessville.com
Ariel Mengarini annotated this game for the tournament book, and he wrote "The King's Gambit is essentially unsound and should not be essayed unless one is fully booked up as well as willing to gamble..."

-> www.littlegreenfootballs.com
#32 "For white I'm still a sucker for the Kings Gambit. I like the tactical possibilities even though it is unsound..."

-> www.gutenberg.org
Lasker,edward(not the other one)-- in his book chess strategy --"In the King's gambit, White's attempt to bring away Black's King's Pawn may be
an unsound scheme, even if worked out to its logical conclusion"

-> www.insight.demon.co.uk
Tryfon Gavriel, Janet Edwardson
"Steinitz achieved his goal of taking chess forward, allowing players to view it in a more sophisticated positional way. He put an end to the domination of unsound gambits, such as the Kings Gambit and Evans gambit."

Also....I would like to point out that many outstanding players and world champions have played unsound gambits, so the fact that Fischer and Short have played the KG is not a very strong argument. For example, Kasparov has played the Evans Gambit(considered unsound), Greco, Chigorin, Tartakower, Keres-wc, Spassky-wc have all played the latvian gambit(one of the most widely considered unsound defenses)

Of course everyone is entitled to an opinion.
I am just waiting to hear that the Latvian and Evans gambits are sound as well.

Oh and Ill find the quote from fischer saying that the KG is unsound...I read it in a book a couple years ago, just have to go through the books i read at that time to find it. Ill post it as soon as i do.
ccmcacollister 120 ( +1 | -1 )
BILL WALL's CHESS SITE: Traps and Miniatures If you are really into Chess traps, then you need to see Bill Wall's site, for thousands of them! The first link given is for the overall site. Then there are two sections linked to there for some traps.
I was pleased to find that one of my own Postal Chess games from APCT (Amer. Postal Chess Tournaments) qualified for inclusion. It is from Board#2 of that organization's own Regional Team Championship of 1987, vs Postal Chess Expert Brad Jenison. I submitted it to another site managed by a friend of his Mr. Wall, who kindly forwarded it on to him as a possible original trap. I was surprised to learn that is it only semi-original, having been apparently mentioned one time in the past by Lasker, as a game note during an annotation! But that my game is the first known to him that has actually demonstrated the trap during play.
*****
The first link given is for his overall site. The second is for section #2 of the traps & miniatures, which go over 15 moves. The final link I list is for section #1 of traps, and is for those which are 14 moves or less. And that last one is where my own game is listed, as #1080 .
*****
(I must paste in the Links to the following post...)
ccmcacollister 48 ( +1 | -1 )
BILL WALL's Links to site, & my game vs Jenison .
-> www.geocities.com

-> www.geocities.com

-> www.geocities.com

Trap #1080.
1.c4 f5 2.d4 e6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Nf3 Ne4 5.Nxe4 fxe4 6.Bg5 exf3 7.Bxd8 Bb4+ 8.Qd2 Bxd2+ 9.Kxd2 fxg2 10.Bxg2 Kxd8 0-1 Jenison-Collister, Postal 1987

brunetti 55 ( +1 | -1 )
wolstoncroft1 Evans Gambit is perfectly sound ("considered unsound" you say, but by whom? By you? Kasparov played it in a top level tournament, no top GM would play an unsound opening at that level), like the King's Gambit. Mengarini, a football site and Tryfon+Edwardson may say whatever they like, but they're sound openings. Sorry if the list of players brought by sfinks are not sufficient to balance those authorities. The Latvian, that could be inferior, has nothing to do with this.

Alex
wolstoncroft1 4 ( +1 | -1 )
Alex Open a book once in a while
wolstoncroft1 74 ( +1 | -1 )
Kasparov played the evans gambit long before chess computers came the norm and could pick it apart....and i just went over unsound openings that GM's have played, just because kasparov played it doesnt mean its must be sound. you know how ridiculous that sounds, Tal was the calssical world champ 60 years ago and blitz champ n the late 80's(maybe early 90"S not sure of the exact date) and the majority of his sacrifices were completely unsound, he still played them...get the point. OTB chess is much more sincere and you dont need to worry about a chess engine prying apart an unsound position. Oh, and i challenge you to play the evans gambit against me anytime....
ccmcacollister 45 ( +1 | -1 )
wolstoncroft1 You should give draw odds if you say the opening is unsound ! After all, Unsound always Loses against best play. And Brunetti would be sacrificing rating points if he only drew the game, tho that is all that would be required to defeat the charge of unsoundness. Are you willing to Resign if you can't Win it outright, proving it unsound? That looks like an interesting contest ... }8-)
I've started a thread to discuss Unsound Openings.
Regards, Craig A.C.
lordoftherings 3 ( +1 | -1 )
I ve played at ICC 1.e4 e5
2.Nf3 Nc6
3.Bc4 Bc5
4.c3 Nf6
5.d4 exd4
6.e5 Ng4
7.Bxf7+ Kxf7
8.Ng5+ Kg8
9.Qb3 and 1-0 (10. or 11.Qf7 #)
brunetti 8 ( +1 | -1 )
wolstoncroft1 Well, let's play 50 simultaneous Evan's games, 14 days per move. OK?

Alex
wolstoncroft1 1 ( +1 | -1 )
I accept
brunetti 10 ( +1 | -1 )
Cool. "wolstoncroft1 requested to automatically decline challenges unless they are: set to be 3 days per move;"

Alex
alberlie 173 ( +1 | -1 )
whoa... I would think that Craigs request is somewhat harsh. Not to get into a discussion about what a "sound" opening really is, but I guess an opening that entails loosing the queen on move three would certainly qualify. However, GM Larry Christiansen frequently plays games with queen odds on the ICC as long as the opposition is rated under 1300 in Blitz.
Same here, I would think that we should take the rating difference into consideration. As of now, both separate about 200 points. That would mean that on any _sound_ opening, brunetti should get about 75% of the points in a match.
Furthermore, I recall reading an article (even posted here on gk around spring this year) that dealt with a more accurate way of valuing pieces, pawns, bishop pairs etc. based on game results. If I recall correctly, one pawn was equivalent to a rating difference of 200-300 points.
The Evans is about sacrificing material for initiative. If having the initiative _is_ worth the pawn (and that would be expected if the opening is sound), then the elo difference should tell. If it isn't, then wolstoncroft1 seems to have a point... Therefore I'd say that if wolstoncroft1 can get a positive score against brunetti, he should have proved his point. At least I wouldn't play anything against someone of my own caliber if I get less then 50% with it against someone rated considerably lower than me...

So, 50 games? That's a lot of seawater chess :o))
brunetti 3 ( +1 | -1 )
Wolstoncroft Are you still there?

Alex
wolstoncroft1 7 ( +1 | -1 )
God forbid that someone have an opinion cotrary to brunetti
tyekanyk 22 ( +1 | -1 )
Short and sweet. Here's a short mate I've seen at first hand played by a friend of mine vs an amateur.
1.d4 e5 2.dxe5 Nc6 3.Nf3 Qe7 4.Bf4 Qb4+ 5.Bd2 Qxb2 6.Bc3 Bb4 7.Qd2 Bxc3 8.Qxc3 Qc1#.
I haven't searched it in any database, as it is too coffee-house style to be worth the bother.
tugger 18 ( +1 | -1 )
wolstoncroft1 e4 e5
f4 exf
Bc4 Qh4+
Kh1 (i assume this is meant to be Kf1?) Nf6
Nf3 Qg4
Bxf7+ Kd8
Nc3 and you can see the queen has no where to go and after Ne2 by white next move the queen will fall.

eh?

Nc3.... d6
Ne2 Qd7

queen is safe

have i missed something?
tugger 55 ( +1 | -1 )
game in progress..... so please don't comment yet, but i think this is an example of a trap....

i say i think, as i haven't won the piece yet, i may have overlooked something, but i'm sure i have at least a knight in return for a pawn, with maybe few trade offs. feel free to point out any flaws after the game has finished.....

1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 d6
3. Bc4 h6
4. Nc3 Nf6
5. d4 exd4
6. Nxd4 c5
7. Nf3 Nc6
8. Qe2 g6
9. Nd5 Bg7
10. e5 dxe5
11. Nxe5 Nd4

please, let me reiterate, don't confirm i have a piece, or point out flaws yet. this game is against my friend, there is fierce rivalry, not least because i'm better! and i do not fancy being accused of breaking any rules.
tugger 22 ( +1 | -1 )
12. Nc6+ Nxe2 queen exchange, he has nowhere to retreat the knight, i have, and i threaten the fork to win his rook. he loses the knight.....

the game hasn't finished, though, i don't think he'll resign just yet, though he may as well, so no direct replies yet.....
tugger 42 ( +1 | -1 )
i won the piece..... then threw a knight at him like an idiot, here - have this - i don't need it.....

the only thing worse than being crap at chess is being good but making stupid bloody mistakes that costs you games. now i'm a pawn down, inferior position, and screwed. the only hope i've got is pulling off a move he won't notice, but the chances of that happening are diminishing with every exchange......
peonferoz 57 ( +1 | -1 )
lol i think that this variation--->
"e4 e5
f4 exf
Bc4 Qh4+
Kh1 Nf6
Nf3 Qg4
Bxf7+ Kd8
Nc3 and you can see the queen has no where to go and after Ne2 by white next move the queen will fall. "
--->allows the trip with the black,s help at move5..Qg4? why is necessary that move. U can play 5...Qh6 and although the queen hadn,t mobility it defends the extra pawn at f5 which restrict white,s development. In adddition the white,s bishop couldn,t take the pawn at f7.
I show 2 probably continuations...

1)
e4 e5
f4 exf
Bc4 Qh4+
Kh1 Nf6
Nf3 Qh6
d6 Ng5
Nc3 c6... after black,s castle white has serious troubles

2)
e4 e5
f4 exf
Bc4 Qh4+
Kh1 Nf6
Nf3 Qh6
Nc3(the best) d6
d4 Be6
Qd3 Nbd7
Bxe6 fxe6
Qc4 O-O-O
Qxe6 g5 with initiative
brunetti 11 ( +1 | -1 )
Wolstoncroft1 I'm looking forward to our theme match, that you accepted on December 26th.

Best regards, Alex