Fascinating Game of Chess with Argentinian Opponent

The Game!

The chessboard is set. I face an opponent from Argentina. Enedesuario is his username on Chess.com. He draws the white team which automatically puts me at a disadvantage.

It’s the USA playing as an international player vs Argentina. The internet offers no home-field advantage. Each opponent enters the chess realm in cyberspace and chooses to play a random game.

Each player chooses their game options. I always choose a 5 minute Blitz. Longer games are too boring and I normally run out of time on shorter games.

Once you click on the button to begin your game, your opponent is chosen at random from a list of other players who decided to play the same game type as you at the same time. In this case, Enedesuario has become my nemesis.

We virtually face one another from across the board… across a vast distance made negligible by the immediate interaction of the internet. There is no sizing your opponent up by eye movement or body inflection, but rather by analyzing his moves.

Game Play Sequence Opening Moves

My opponent opens with the Queen’s pawn. I counter with the Englund Gambit effectively negating the Queen’s Gambit had he been considering using it.

Queen’s Gambit & Englund’s Gambit Opening Strategies Thwarted

I had denied him the opportunity to play the Queen’s Gambit had that been his plan by opening with the Englund’s Gambit.

He goes on to support his position with the Queen Bishop’s pawn which negates my tactic. I answer by advancing the King’s pawn to e4. Does this gain me a position advantage? It was one of my listed Best Moves.

Enedesuario proceeded to threaten my King’s pawn with his King Bishop’s pawn which was an excellent attempt to thwart any advantage I might have gained from my previous move. I immediately support my King’s pawn with the Queen’s pawn. Was this my best choice? What should I have done at this point? What should White do next?

Enedesuario chooses to capture my King’s pawn which was his Best Move. This does nothing to lessen my advantage, does it? I immediately capture his pawn in return thereby advantage regained is it not? The pawn capture did end up being one of my Best Moves.

From this point, I can support my advanced pawn with my King Bishop’s pawn thereby fortifying my advanced position. Would this be advantageous or should I consider some other avenue of attack? Maybe if he threatens my pawn with his Queen I should place him in check with my Queen. Maybe this should be my next move regardless of what he does. Any suggestions on this strategy?

Instead, he threatened my pawn with his Queen’s Knight which was an Excellent Move. What should be my response at this point? Should I go ahead and pursue placing him in check? Or should I advance my pawn to threaten his Knight? So far, I hadn’t developed my game very well I don’t think.

I chose to support my current position by advancing my King Bishop’s pawn. Was this a mistake or a valid move? Apparently, it was just a Good Move. I felt like I should have brought my back rank into the game by developing either the Queen’s Bishop or the King’s Knight.

I mean, so far all I have moved is pawns and I know it’s more advantageous to bring out the back rank than to advance pawns. So, tell me what you think I should have done. Anyway, his answer was to bring his King’s pawn up to halt the forward movement of my advanced pawn.

Developing the Board: Bringing the Back Rank Into Action

Anyway, at this point I was stuck with the moves I had made. What do you suppose I did next? If you said I broke ranks and brought the rear guard into play, you are definitely right. But which piece?

I chose to advance the King’s Knight to f6. Don’t ask why, my game isn’t that sophisticated. It just seemed like a good move at the time. The game analysis says it was an Excellent Move. What do you think? What could I have done that might have been better?

His answer to my play was also considered an Excellent Move. He developed his King’s Knight bringing it out to h3. At this point, I consider my best option to be clearing out the back rank on the Queen’s side to set up a castle move. Instead, I brought my King’s final pawn into action. Was this a bonehead move or what?

It was a knee-jerk reaction following my prior plan of further developing my King’s Knight. I don’t recall what that plan was now, but I remember it was thwarted by his Knight. I should have brought either my Knight or Bishop from the Queen’s side I think. What’s your thought on this?

So, he answers by advancing his Knight to f4. What should I do at this point? I could advance my Knight to g4, but I really should develop my back rank. I decided to threaten his Knight with my Bishop, which is a Good Move. I feel I really should have developed my Queen’s side though. What do you think?

Tactical Chess Advantages in Mid-Game

He further supports his Knight by advancing his King Knight’s pawn to g3. At this point, I could have threatened his knight with my pawn, but I don’t see any real tactical advantage here. I feel the urgency to bring out my Queen’s side of the board but I can’t see any real tactical advantage there either at the moment.

My thinking at this point is to capture his Knight with my Bishop. Guess what I did… I did just that! Of course, I expected him to capture my Bishop with his King Knight’s pawn. And it is just what he did. The analysis said this was an inaccuracy. What should he have done? My guess is to capture with the King’s pawn instead.

My next move was unbelievable… IN A BAD WAY! I advanced my Knight to h5. Knowing I need to bring the Queen’s side of the board out. This seems to be a frequent mistake I make by leaving one side of the board virtually untouched while carrying out my attacks with only half of my forces.

This actually seems to work out well sometimes. I’m guessing with lesser players it works fairly well but not so much with more advanced players. What do you think?

Do I Finally Develop the Queen’s Side?

To my surprise and enjoyment, my opponent makes a mistake by advancing his Queen Knight’s pawn to b3. Why would he do that? He doesn’t gain any advantage that I can discern.

Sure it allows his Queen’s Bishop an open path. But what real good does that do? If I were him, I would have placed me in check with his King’s Bishop. What would you have done?

Time to Break Out the Big Guns!

I decided it was time to put on some pressure. I place him in check with my Queen! He has no choice but to move his King. I don’t even truly realize how much danger he is in, but I know it’s really not good for him in any case. Can you see the extent of danger he is in at this point?

All he can do is move his King to e2. At this point, I should have placed him in check with my Knight. But I didn’t see the big picture yet. Instead, I decided to pull out my Queen’s Bishop thinking I could put more pressure on his King. The analyzer called it an Excellent Move, but I know now I should have placed him in check with my Knight.

Why he decided to bring out his Queen’s Bishop is beyond me. I guess he didn’t see how precarious his situation was either. What should he have done at this point instead?

If he had moved his Queen over to threaten my Queen, I still would have placed him in Check with my Knight. He would have been forced to move his King to f2.

I think his best move would have been Rook to g1. That would have thwarted my placing him in Check with my Knight. But I would have Checked him with my Queen at that point. Then he could have placed his Rook in the way. At which point I could have placed him in Check with my Knight… But this is merely speculation and chasing a rabbit down the hole. So back to reality.

Anyway, this is when I saw it! I placed his King in Check with my Knight like I should have done on the previous move. For some reason, game analysis said this was an inaccuracy! What else should I have done? I could have put him in Check with my Queen, but I didn’t see that leading anywhere.

Anyway, he only had 2 choices, move his King back home or to f2. At this point, his Rook is MINE! Plus he is in check again! He decides to move his King back home which the analysis flags as a BLUNDER!

The alternate choice wasn’t great, but it may have saved his bacon… Do you know how? I now realize it wouldn’t have resulted in a CheckMate immediately. Can you see how it would have played out?

The Final Curtain: CHECKMATE!

But the game plays how the game plays. He still had plenty of time, more than 3 minutes 30 seconds. But he reacted badly and the end result was not in his favor.

Of course, I took his Rook which placed him in Check again. This left him with a bit of deja vu! He was forced to bring his King forward once more. And now I can deliver the coup de gras! His days are numbered! His time is at an end! The final curtain falls!

CHECKMATE WITH MY QUEEN AT F2! That’s All Folks!

Let me know what you think about my game and especially this presentation of the game. I would really love to get your input, comments, AND criticism! Don’t be shy!

Game Analysis

1. d4 e5 2. c3 e4 3. f3 d5 4. fxe4 dxe4 5. Nd2 f5 6. e3 Nf6 7. Nh3 g6 8. f4 Bd6 9. g3 Bfx4 10. gxf4 Nh5 11. b3 Qh4+ 12. Ke2 Bd7 13. Ba3 Ng3+ 14. Ke1 Nxh1+ 15. Ke2 Qf2# 0-1

This was a 15-move game. According to the game review, I made 5 Best Moves, 2 Excellent, 4 Good, 1 Book, and 2 inaccuracies. What was the other move? My math may not be great, but I only get 14 when I add all these up. Would that be the end move that was the checkmate? I suppose that makes sense. Why would that be rated?

My opponent’s moves were 1 Best Move, 3 Excellent, 3 Good, 1 Book, 3 Inaccuracies, 1 Mistake, and 1 Blunder. This only adds up to 13 moves. Right? So 2 of my opponent’s moves aren’t listed. Can you tell me why? Seriously, I don’t understand it.

I can understand the checkmate move not being listed. But which 2 moves of my opponent aren’t listed? Someone, please explain. Is it because they were forced moves with only one possible option? That must be it. Right? Dang! I figured it out… Go Me!

Let’s Wrap This Up

This may not have been a very exciting game, but I was quite pleased with myself for the most part. Sure I made some mistakes. But the end game was quite well played I think. It would have been a much different game if he had decided to move his King to f2 instead of its home square.

Although I would have had a marked advantage, the game would have gone on. I wonder how it would have played out. I have every confidence that I would have triumphed in the end. I would have only had a 5-point advantage. All it would take is for me to make enough mistakes for him to come back and possibly win. And I’m known for folding under pressure.

But the game played out like the game played out. No crying over spilled milk… or did he? I think I would have! I would have ranted and raved about how lucky he was! Spouting all kinds of names at him! I know, I’m a sore loser.

But one thing I don’t do is leave the game with the timer still running. I will resign so my opponent can move on. I hate it when people do that to me. That’s quite childish and disrespectful I think. What do you think? Drop a comment so I will know that I at least touched a nerve in you if nothing else. Otherwise, you’re a Dork! Don’t be a Dork!

Skillit, AKA RLDubb,
Founder of I ♥ Chess ✓Mate