Full Game

I played the white pieces.

The game started out in a normal position. In fact, 5 moves in, at the position below, masters have had 13,500 games in this exact position. This essentially means that both players had been playing well through the first moves of the game. No blunders, no mistakes. Just good chess.

However, on black’s move, they played Ne4. While it does grab some space in the center, it has downsides that would become problematic later into the game. Firstly, it allows the trade of the dark-squared bishops. This trade is good for white because black’s pawns are mostly on light squares which leaves weaknesses on the dark squares that my knight could take advantage of later in the game. The second issue with Ne4 is that it can easily be kicked out from its post. Just a few moves later, white removed the knight from the center, retreating it back to the f6 square. This isn’t even to mention the fact that black is now down many moves in development and will struggle to get their pieces onto the board quickly. Look through the moves until 7. Nf6.

On move 9, I played Qb3. This put a double attack on 2 undefended pawns. This became possible due to the lack of development on black’s part. Both the b7 and d5 pawns were both attacked, and both are very valuable pawns. The correct response from black would be either Bc6 or Nc6. Both moves would effectively defend the pawns previously mentioned. However, black played b6 to defend the pawn, but left the d5 pawn with only 2 defenders to the 3 attackers of white. This led to white gaining a material advantage and left black with no central pawns. Look through the moves until 17. Qe5.

On move 17, I played Qe5, offering a queen trade. A queen trade in this position would be great for me. White is up 2 entire pawns and there are enough pieces on the board to ensure that progress can be made. On black’s move, they played Qxe5 in which I swiftly took back with my knight, playing Nxe5. In this position, the computer gives an evaluation of +6.6 although I am only up 2 points of material. This great position is due to the great knight on e5 and that I have 2 central pawns that black cannot easily contest. The game developed into and endgame of rook and knight vs rook and knight, but I had many more pawns to work with. The crushing blow was the knight fork in which black resigned the game.

Below was the final position.

1-0

Key Takeways:

Central pawns are very important to control the position. Without them, it will lead to your opponent dominating the position.

Trade pieces when you are up material and see a clear way to progress the game in your favor.

Full Game

I played the white pieces.

The game opened normally with the first four moves resembling a Benoni Defense (1. d4, Nf6 2. c4, c5 3. d5), but on black’s third move, they play b5, the Benko Gambit. I take on b5, he plays a6, giving up his pawn, and I took on a6 (4. cxb5, a6 5. bxa6). This variation is called the “Benko Gambit Accepted: Fully Accepted Variation.” In this variation, white is given a pawn for center pawn control and bishop and queen activity.

On move 6, I played Nc3, simply developing the piece to defend the pawn on d5. There are two main lines for black in this position. Bxa6 to regain a pawn, but also activate the bishop to pressure the center of my position. If black played this, my development would have been much harder. The other is g6, recognizing that the a6 pawn could be taken at any time, and preparing for the development of the bishop to the longest diagonal on the board. My opponent played neither. He/she played Qa5. I countered, playing Qa4, forcing the queens off the board. I traded queens off the board as I believed that the material advantage of a pawn would be enough to give me an advantage.

On move 14, black played e5. This move blocked in the powerful bishop on g7. This is significant as the bishop acted as a major hinderance to my rooks’ activity on the queenside, but after it was blocked off, I felt confident in putting rooks on the a and b files without any major hinderances. The game then developed into the following position (Move 18).

In this position, white has a slight advantage in that my pieces simply do more. My dark-squared bishop indirectly puts pressure on black’s rook while black’s dark squared bishop is staring into a pawn with little it can do to become more active. My knights occupy important squares while one of black’s is on the edge. My rooks are behind pawns while black’s rooks are either being pressured by a bishop or hasn’t move since castling.

Then black made a large blunder on move 21. By not doubling his rooks on the b file and instead playing Nb4?, he allowed me to play a5. This loses the critical center pawn on d6 or an exchange, a rook for a knight. Move through this position until move 26.

The game moved to where I was able to capture black’s rook for a knight on move 26, winning an exchange.

Although I did have to give back the exchange, I was able to capture many of black’s important, central pawns, allowing me to blow the game wide open. In this endgame, this would give me large advantages if many pieces were traded off. Gaining black’s central pawns was worth more than the exchange, especially considering the worth of the bishop black gave up. Move through this position until move 36.

I then started pushing the outside a and b pawns in order to create pressure on black to give up his pieces to prevent my advanced pawns from becoming queens. I pushed the b pawn, giving up the a-pawn in the process, but the pressure it created was immense. I was able to trade off the rooks due to a tactical error by black and win black’s knight.

From this position, up in material an entire piece and 2 pawns. I was winning by a large margin. I maneuvered my king and knight to push my e-pawn to the end of the board, promoting it to a queen. I have included some images and ideas of my manuvability. Move throught this position until the end of the game.

This was the final position.

1-0

Key Takeaways:

Not all pieces are worth the material count generally given to them. Sometimes they are more and sometimes they are less. Being able to recongnize this and react accordingly will allow for explosive moved with minor pieces or pawns.

Doubling both rooks on a file is very powerful and can limit the movement of your opponent around the doubled rooks.

Full Game:

The game opened with simple developing moves, but there was not much of a structure by either player. By move 9, the game was unique among top players. The opening led to a neutral position with the slight imbalances of a bishop for a knight and white’s slightly more active queen.

The game developed smoothly until move 13. White played d4, disrupting the entire center of the board and causing chaos. However, this move shows my opponent was ready for a battle for the center.

This pawn break has a couple of ideas. The first is to challenge the center with his pawn to remove or weaken my strong pawn on e5. The second is to open lines for the rook on d1 and dually make it more effective within the game. On the next moved, I decided that the advantages my opponent would get if I didn’t take would be large, especially considering the rook on d1 eyeing my queen. For example, if I played Rae1, my opponent would be able play dxe5 and I would not be able to take back due to the pin on my queen. In this example, I would also lose my knight on f3.

After considering all of the ideas in the position, I decided to play exd4.

In the next couple of moves, nothing explosive happened, but on move 16, I played d5 challenging the center. Similarly to my opponent’s ideas in the previous position, my goal was to open up my rook on e8 and potentially win a center pawn. My opponent blundered by playing Qd2, leaving his pawn with only 2 defenders to my 3 attackers with no countering ideas on another part of the board. This allowed me to win the pawn and gain the slight material advantage (5 pawns to 6 pawns).

The game moved along slowly until move 22 in which white played Rde1, challenging my queen in the center.

Here I had a crucial decision to make. I could play either the safer Qc5+ or play the material imbalance of a 2 rooks vs queen endgame. Qc5+ is a solid option. It is check so it effectively gave me another move and it also protects my pawn on c7.

I also could play Qxe1 and play the material imbalance of 2 rooks vs queen. Generally, the 2 rooks are better than the queen when they can be coordinated and when the queen does not have many checks against the opposing king. I would be giving up the c7 pawn for the better set of pieces entering the endgame. I calculated that the better option would be to take rooks in exchange of the queen. Scrool from move 22 to 24.

From there, I was able to coordinate my rooks to first collect my opponent’s c pawn using a tactical idea of attacking his queen and attacking his pawn. on the next move, I was able to gain my pawn advantage back. This significantly made it easier to advance the pawn. Typically, pushing a pawn with 2 rooks against a queen is a hard challenge so it signifcantly shortened the game. Look through the game from move 32 to 37.

My opponent tried to rush his king in the center of the board to stop the pawn from queening, but I kept checking his king to continue moving my outside pawn up the board. This continued happening until he resigned with the inevitable promotion to the pawn into a queen.

0-1

Key Takeaways:

Beware of pins that can occur through pawn breaks.

2 rooks vs queen endgames are very tricky, but generally, if the rooks are coordinated and the king is safe from relentless checks, the rooks are better.

Last time, you guys were intersted in my Google Slides about the the history of chess. Thus, here it is to see.

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1bUKJdo5-yg5VsNYScoabK5Smic6e-YHpQNhBCC-dmxE/edit?usp=sharing

Note: This was made just before COVID hit, and chess has changed a lot since COVID started. After looking at this presentation, I realized that only 2.5 years later, it is already outdated.