Er zijn momenteel 16730 spelers online!
Mens tegen machine - succes!
Correspondentieschaak op elk moment!
Stem op de beste zet om te winnen!
Hoe goed ben jij?
Backgammon, Yatzy, en nog veel meer!
Verfijn je tactisch inzicht!
Krijg advies en spelinzicht!
Leer van topschakers en profs!
Bekijk miljoenen meesterpartijen!
Je virtuele schaakcoach!
Perfectioneer je openingszetten!
Test je vaardigheden tegen de computer!
Vind de juiste privécoach!
Kun jij hem elke dag oplossen?
Breng alles samen!
Beginners, start hier!
Maak vrienden en speel teamwedstrijden!
Nieuws uit de schaakwereld!
Zoeken in alle leden van Chess.com
Vind lokale clubs & evenementen!
Wie van je vrienden is de beste?
Lees wat leden zeggen!
Hi! I've not been playing long (played a bit when I was a kid, and enjoying playing again now, despite the odd moment of head-banging stupidity). Had a game against a higher-ranked opponent, and I thought that towards the end I had what should have been a game-winning advantage. Would anyone like to tell me where I went wrong (either in the end game or earlier - I know there are a few foul-ups in there).
I've added notes through the game, as best I can remember. I figure that at turn 40 I should have a decisive advantage, but fluffed it. And 49.b5 was a mistake I'm still kicking myself over.
I won't comment on every single little thing.
13. Bxc2, forget the knight on d6, trap it, attack it, whatever. I'll just take the pawn. White's development stinks.
20...g5 is a bad move. 21.gxf4 gives you very crappy pawns on the kingside. Anything but this.
40... At this point, you can win a pawn back and it appears like you should win.
47....Nxh3+ now you must be winning.
49...Kd6 looks like one way. The endgame is a bit tricky though.
46 Nxh3+ seems better...? But I am not certain of it.
Thanks, Bonesy1116. I didn't really think about pawn structure from 20.g5, but now you mention it it seems obvious that that would make a mess of things.
Thanks jonnin. I wasn't sure about the rook swap, especially with a pawn race going on, but I figured that the knight advantage would count for more with the rooks off the board. I was also a bit worried that I couldn't defend my pawns from a rook as easily as he could, as mine were in a terrible arrangement and distant from the King.
It is difficult to defend against multiple pawns by just having a knight. You must play precisely to win. It's a better decision to keep the rooks on the board as they are better defenders and can counterattack very easily.
I think 54... f6 looks like a mistake. 54... Nxb4 55. d6 a5 might work for a tricky draw.
Why do people play 1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 2 exd5?!
door Ziryab enkele minuten geleden
5/25/2016 - From Side To Side
door tommysue enkele minuten geleden
My first win against Computer 4
door Aravindsomaraj 4 minuten geleden
The Red NOJ Dubrovnik II
door OMGChess14 14 minuten geleden
cheating (by playing for a draw)
door Ninjakiwi17 16 minuten geleden
Checkmate problem of the week#1
door Another-Life 19 minuten geleden
Chess Book Recomendations
door logozar 24 minuten geleden
I hate endgames
door Ziryab 27 minuten geleden
TT accuracy calculation system incapable of doing simple math
door RookTheElevator 36 minuten geleden
Fried Liver Attack without Two Knights Defence
door eimajjjj 46 minuten geleden
Waarom lid worden | Schaakonderwerpen |
Veel gestelde vragen |
Hulp en ondersteuning |
Juridische informatie |
© 2016 Chess.com
• Schaken - Nederlands
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!