The 2,000,000th post game

I'm debating on formats; which seems easiest to follow.

Riv, give some feedback please --
Were you able to understand the games I've posted the past few pages?
Or were they as hard to understand as the Steinitz vs Rock chess video that I posted a month or so ago?

Do game logs like the following make any sense once I've removed the time stamps from them?

[WhiteElo "1700"]
[BlackElo "2009"]
[PlyCount "52"]

1. e4 {[%emt 0:0:2]} e5 {[%emt 0:0:2]} 2. Nf3 {[%emt 0:0:2]} f5 {[%emt 0:0:2]} 3. d3 {[%emt 0:0:3]} Bb4+ {[%emt 0:0:6]} 4. Bd2 {[%emt 0:0:4]} Bc5 {[%emt 0:0:3]} 5. exf5 {[%emt 0:0:3]} Nf6 {[%emt 0:0:9]} 6. Nxe5 {[%emt 0:0:5]} d6 {[%emt 0:0:5]} 7. Nc4 {[%emt 0:0:4]} 0-0 {[%emt 0:0:24]} 8. Be3 {[%emt 0:0:5]} Re8 {[%emt 0:0:7]} 9. Be2 {[%emt 0:0:3]} Bxf5 {[%emt 0:0:25]} 10. 0-0 {[%emt 0:0:6]} Rxe3 {[%emt 0:0:17]} 11. Nxe3 {[%emt 0:0:6]} Be6 {[%emt 0:0:18]} 12. h3 {[%emt 0:0:14]} Bxh3 {[%emt 0:0:20]} 13. gxh3 {[%emt 0:0:4]} d5 {[%emt 0:0:12]} 14. Ng4 {[%emt 0:0:6]} Nfd7 {[%emt 0:0:35]} 15. Nc3 {[%emt 0:0:11]} Qg5 {[%emt 0:0:6]} 16. a3 {[%emt 0:0:18]} h5 {[%emt 0:0:18]} 17. Kg2 {[%emt 0:0:12]} hxg4 {[%emt 0:0:5]} 18. Bxg4 {[%emt 0:0:4]} Bd6 {[%emt 0:0:52]} 19. Re1 {[%emt 0:0:4]} Nc6 {[%emt 0:0:8]} 20. Kf1 {[%emt 0:0:20]} Nd4 {[%emt 0:0:15]} 21. Bxd7 {[%emt 0:0:22]} Rf8 {[%emt 0:0:42]} 22. Re3 {[%emt 0:0:14]} Bh2 {[%emt 0:0:17]} 23. Ke1 {[%emt 0:0:7]} Qg1+ {[%emt 0:0:19]} 24. Kd2 {[%emt 0:0:10]} Qxf2+ {[%emt 0:0:6]} 25. Ne2 {[%emt 0:0:3]} Bf4 {[%emt 0:0:12]} 26. c3 {[%emt 0:0:7]} Bxe3# {[%emt 0:0:8]Mate} 0-1

Re: Last posted 2 pages ago:

Very different game played than the one in the previous post.
Elegant ending, though not QUITE as singular as the 2 preceding logged games in this thread ...

[WhiteElo "1993"]
[BlackElo "2124"]
[PlyCount "39"]

1. e4 e5
2. f4 d5
3. Nc3 d4
4. Nb1 exf4
5. Nf3 c5
6. Bc4 Nf6
7. d3 Ng4
8. Bxf4 Ne3
9. Bxf7+ Kxf7
10. Ne5+ Kg8
11. Qh5 Qf6
12. Bxe3 dxe3
13. Rf1 Qe7
14. Rf7 Qe8
15. Rxg7+ Kxg7
16. Qxe8 Rg8
17. Qf7+ Kh8
18. Nc3 Nc6
19. Qf6+ Bg7
20. Nf7#

1-0

Originally posted by Sancty
i like that this phrase is the 1 millionth post tho

[WhiteElo "1746"]
[BlackElo "2014"]
[PlyCount "70"]

1. Nf3 {[%emt 0:0:2]} e6 {[%emt 0:0:6]} 2. d4 {[%emt 0:0:2]} c5 {[%emt 0:0:4]} 3. dxc5 {[%emt 0:0:2]} Bxc5 {[%emt 0:0:2]} 4. e4 {[%emt 0:0:2]} Qb6 {[%emt 0:0:8]} 5. Qe2 {[%emt 0:0:29]} Nf6 {[%emt 0:0:27]} 6. Nc3 {[%emt 0:0:13]} Ng4 {[%emt 0:0:26]} 7. Na4 {[%emt 0:0:13]} Qb4+ {[%emt 0:0:12]} 8. Nc3 {[%emt 0:0:13]} Bxf2+ {[%emt 0:0:8]} 9. Kd1 {[%emt 0:0:14]} Bc5 {[%emt 0:0:21]} 10. a3 {[%emt 0:0:15]} Qa5 {[%emt 0:0:29]} 11. Bd2 {[%emt 0:0:27]} Nf2+ {[%emt 0:0:9]} 12. Kc1 {[%emt 0:0:15]} Nxh1 {[%emt 0:0:3]} 13. Qb5 {[%emt 0:0:13]} Nc6 {[%emt 0:0:35]} 14. Qxa5 {[%emt 0:0:5]} Nxa5 {[%emt 0:0:3]} 15. b4 {[%emt 0:0:4]} Bxb4 {[%emt 0:0:51]} 16. axb4 {[%emt 0:0:3]} Nc6 {[%emt 0:0:2]} 17. Ne2 {[%emt 0:0:14]} Nf2 {[%emt 0:0:11]} 18. Ng3 {[%emt 0:0:14]} f5 {[%emt 0:0:29]} 19. Bb5 {[%emt 0:0:11]} fxe4 {[%emt 0:0:7]} 20. Bxc6 {[%emt 0:0:16]} bxc6 {[%emt 0:0:30]} 21. Ne1 {[%emt 0:0:19]} Ng4 {[%emt 0:0:21]} 22. Nxe4 {[%emt 0:0:14]} 0-0 {[%emt 0:0:11]} 23. Nf3 {[%emt 0:0:13]} d5 {[%emt 0:0:5]} 24. Nd6 {[%emt 0:0:21]} Bd7 {[%emt 0:0:15]} 25. Nb7 {[%emt 0:0:19]} e5 {[%emt 0:0:13]} 26. Nc5 {[%emt 0:0:9]} Bc8 {[%emt 0:0:19]} 27. h3 {[%emt 0:0:10]} e4 {[%emt 0:0:10]} 28. hxg4 {[%emt 0:0:7]} exf3 {[%emt 0:0:2]} 29. gxf3 {[%emt 0:0:3]} Rxf3 {[%emt 0:0:3]} 30. c3 {[%emt 0:0:7]} Bxg4 {[%emt 0:0:8]} 31. Ra6 {[%emt 0:0:16]} Rf1+ {[%emt 0:0:21]} 32. Kb2 {[%emt 0:0:11]} Bf5 {[%emt 0:0:11]} 33. Rxc6 {[%emt 0:0:8]} Rb1+ {[%emt 0:0:9]} 34. Ka3 {[%emt 0:0:8]} a5 {[%emt 0:0:4]} 35. Be3 {[%emt 0:0:34]} axb4# {[%emt 0:0:5]Mate} 0-1

These guys look possessed.

Nancy Steadman Shipman, first scan.
Experience suggests, based on her body type and size of her frame, she'd beat the girl in the last scan in an armwrestling contest.

time to actually marry the following, posted at least two or three times now, with the illustrated actions:

Very different game played than the one in the previous post.
Elegant ending, though not QUITE as singular as the 2 preceding logged games in this thread ...

[WhiteElo "1993"]
[BlackElo "2124"]
[PlyCount "39"]

1. e4 e5
2. f4 d5
3. Nc3 d4
4. Nb1 exf4
5. Nf3 c5
6. Bc4 Nf6
7. d3 Ng4
8. Bxf4 Ne3
9. Bxf7+ Kxf7
10. Ne5+ Kg8
11. Qh5 Qf6
12. Bxe3 dxe3
13. Rf1 Qe7
14. Rf7 Qe8
15. Rxg7+ Kxg7
16. Qxe8 Rg8
17. Qf7+ Kh8
18. Nc3 Nc6
19. Qf6+ Bg7
20. Nf7#

1-0

Part 1 of 2

The chess-made-overly-simple takeaway of the preceding post?

If the White Queen moves next to the Black King, White wins.

----------

With that fear put into Black, Black soon finds himself in a protective "box" in the corner, which IS protection against the White Queen ...

... but not the White knight.

(Part 2 of 2.)

Alright, time to re-visit THIS one now:

Game played relatively recently which may have had the most absolute pins I'll land this month:

[WhiteElo "1880"]
[BlackElo "1969"]
[PlyCount "58"]

1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 f5
3. Nc3 Bc5
4. d4 exd4
5. Nxd4 fxe4
6. Nxe4 Qe7
7. f3 Nf6
8. Bd3 Bxd4
9. c3 Bb6
10. Bg5 0-0
11. Bxf6 Rxf6
12. Qe2 Re6
13. 0-0-0 d5
14. Nd2 Rxe2
15. Bxe2 Be3
16. Rhe1 Bf5
17. g4 Bg6
18. f4 Bxf4
19. Bf3 Qc5
20. h4 Nc6
21. h5 Bd3
22. Be2 Be4
23. Rf1 Bg5
24. a3 a5
25. Bf3 Bd3
26. Rh1 Nb4
27. axb4 axb4
28. Bxd5+ Kh8
29. Be4 Ra1#

0-1

1. Latvian Gambit ...

2. ... rejected. Pawns are traded off after White aggresses against Black's dark-square bishop ...

3. ... and another set is traded as the White Knight retaliates against THAT ...

4. The Black Queen, by threatening the White King behind the knight on e4, pins that white knight to the spot.
The pawn at f2 is moved up to f3 to protect this same knight from the Black Queen.

5. White moves his light-square bishop from its starting point to d3, intending to castle Kingside ...

6. Unfortunately, White has overlooked that only the White Queen was protecting his knight at d4, and that his bishop move just blocked her from protecting him.
Now, not only has he lost a piece, but he is prevented from castling, at least on the King side, since Black's bishop, positioned now on d4 in place of the white knight that it just took, commands g1, the space White's king needs to go to in order to castle on that side. He moves the pawn at e2 to e3 in order to chase Black's dark-square bishop away ...

7. ... and succeeds.
Black's dark-square bishop IS forced away.
Unfortunately, though, that bishop only retreats towards its own forces along the g1-a7 diagonal. Since bishops, like queens and rooks, though much less powerful, can cover any distance, the square White's King needs to go to in order to castle is STILL covered; White still cannot perform the move. So, to make something happen, he attacks Black with his own dark-square bishop ...

8. ... but Black castles to the Kingside himself. So when White takes Black's knight on f6 ...

9. it can be taken in turn without repercussion by Black's Rook on f8.

10. WHY was Black able to avenge the loss of his knight by White's dark-square bishop on f6 without getting taken by White's knight on e4?

Because that knight is still pinned by Black's Queen, who would have a free shot at White's King if that e4 knight were to move.

That knight is STILL pinned to that spot, even as it was 4 moves or so prior.

So White moves his own Queen to e2 to break the pin.
Now the knight at e4 CAN retaliate by taking Black's rook at f6. And Black would not only be forced to respond, but would have to give up defense of his own queen.

Because White taking that f6 Rook would de facto attack Black's king on g8.

And knight checks CANNOT be blocked and ignored.

This would put White in a good position. In fact, it could win Black's Queen if he's not careful ...

So Black moves his rook from f6 to e6 ...

🙁 (Not showable at the moment, scan got erased.)

11. Unfortunately, Black WASN'T being all that careful in moving that rook.
Hindsight is 20/20; White could have really taken advantage of things by moving his remaining bishop to c4 immediately following. This would have pinned the rook into place in defense of his king on g8.
Fortunately for Black, White, having found himself hampered twice now by pins, REALLY wants to get his King to safety, ignoring any other considerations.
So White castles on the QUEEN side ...

12. ... and in response to Black's Queen pawn attacking it, moves the knight he's been unable to move for half the game.

13. The White knight's retreat to safety unwittingly leaves the white queen exposed. The Black rook at e6 takes the White Queen, and is taken in turn by White's bishop.

Hey Blue are you on any chess apps? You seem like a pretty serious player so I'm sure I'd lose but it's always a fun time

14. Hindsight is 20/20 ...

With more time, would Black have realized White's remaining bishop was free for the taking?

It's ignored either way for something with more appeal; White's King, who might be put under "house arrest" if Black can get White distracted for just 1 or 2 more maneuvers ...

15. By move 20, the winning design has been traced. The black Queen will remain at c5; the Black bishops, though they will move regularly in response to White, will only really move back and forth along the h6-c1 and h7-b2 diagonals till the end of the game. The White King is effectively on lockdown ...

16. ... which will last only until the "a" column can be cleared by Black's Queen knight sacrificing itself, so the Rook at a8 can move to a1 to secure the win.

Originally posted by Quincy
Hey Blue are you on any chess apps? You seem like a pretty serious player so I'm sure I'd lose but it's always a fun time

Hey, Quincy.

I'm not CURRENTLY on any chess apps, but that'll probably change in the near future. I think I'm yet only SEMI-serious compared to the kind of player YOU might be thinking of, but I've been told I'm a pretty good teacher; that is, the little that I DO know, I am usually able to share with others to the extent that they can not only understand what I explain but perform on their own with equal or even greater success.

At least in person. I'm a little frustrated in not being able to get truly measurable feedback from a thread of this particular sort, but I've found in other forums I'm observed and gleaned from more than I often realize.

Originally posted by Quincy
I'm sure I'd lose but it's always a fun time

Don't be fooled into thinking I have a stellar win/loss record.

It's true that I frequently perform well against higher-rated players, and I'd like to think I have decent tactical play, but I get my fair share of WAXINGS by people I have no business losing to as well.

In fact, except for novices, I should probably caution to regard what you see from me in many of these games not as advice to follow, but rather me relating:
"Can you believe what I got away with here!?
Hah! I can't believe it, either!"

"waxings" is an awesome slang term I'm so stealing

No problem. Say, if you wander into this thread periodically, let me know if any of the tutorials I post from time to time are helpful, hey?

Take care!

Alright, back to the Quixotian task of reaching this thread's title goal: