In our first chessentials featured Sunday, we analyze a game submitted by the reader under the name of Henrik Ginderskov.
Apparently, after the game, he went on to delete everything related to chess from his web browsers and computer, so I think we can safely assume he was slightly dissapointed with the outcome.
Luckily for us, he returned the websites and felt free enough to share his thoughts about the game. I have added my own analysis of the game as well here. His comments are denoted with HG, and mine with VN. Also, all exclamation and question marks are his own.
Hint: Click on any move, and the pop-up board will appear
White has played a really good game and has kinda lost to himself more than to his opponent. Nothing terrible with that as it happens to every chessplayer here and then. It would be terrible if no conclusions were drawn from this game and no lessons learnt.
I think that most obvious things White player can improve are:
- Tactical calculation - I think at certain moments there were moves that should have been considered, at least. Perhaps 7 cxd5 is too computerish, but meeting b5 with Nxb8 or finding that cute combination at the end could have been found, perhaps.
- Patience is a virtue - One think that I noticed is that the higher the rating a player has, the more patient in chess he is. I think that it is very hard to "do nothing" in chess, most chessplayers have big urge to get active and have constructive plans. I think that the game is a great example of how sometimes the idea of being constantly active can sometimes backfire.