https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=f4HQEpt6Xww
Frank Luntz heard saying Trump might win, pre-election 2016.
I've got a thread devoted to cool chess tactics, titled exactly that, but I need to get a more streamlined style before I begin posting there again.
Played a relatively recent game against a higher ranked opponent where I managed to win via a solo-looking knight mate. I'll put the log down here and then illustrate the game in two or more subsequent posts:
1. e4 {[%emt 0:0:3]} c5 {[%emt 0:0:2]} 2. Bc4 {[%emt 0:0:7]} d6 {[%emt 0:0:3]} 3. Bxf7+ {[%emt 0:0:2]} Kxf7 {[%emt 0:0:5]} 4. Nh3 {[%emt 0:0:3]} Nf6 {[%emt 0:0:5]} 5. Ng5+ {[%emt 0:0:8]} Ke8 {[%emt 0:0:7]} 6. f4 {[%emt 0:0:17]} Bg4 {[%emt 0:0:15]} 7. Nf3 {[%emt 0:0:7]} Nxe4 {[%emt 0:0:16]} 8. 0-0 {[%emt 0:0:4]} Nc6 {[%emt 0:0:22]} 9. d3 {[%emt 0:0:5]} Nf6 {[%emt 0:0:12]} 10. c3 {[%emt 0:0:4]} Qb6 {[%emt 0:0:6]} 11. c4 {[%emt 0:0:10]} Kd7 {[%emt 0:0:11]} 12. a4 {[%emt 0:0:24]} Na5 {[%emt 0:0:22]} 13. Bd2 {[%emt 0:0:12]} Rd8 {[%emt 0:0:22]} 14. Bxa5 {[%emt 0:0:32]} Qxa5 {[%emt 0:0:4]} 15. Nc3 {[%emt 0:0:8]} h5 {[%emt 0:0:10]} 16. Qb3 {[%emt 0:0:13]} Kc7 {[%emt 0:0:9]} 17. Nb5+ {[%emt 0:0:22]} Kb8 {[%emt 0:0:6]} 18. Nh4 {[%emt 0:0:22]} d5 {[%emt 0:0:48]} 19. Ng6 {[%emt 0:0:21]} Rg8 {[%emt 0:0:22]} 20. f5 {[%emt 0:0:33]} Qd2 {[%emt 0:0:21]} 21. d4 {[%emt 0:0:29]} dxc4 {[%emt 0:0:13]} 22. Qg3+ {[%emt 0:0:3]} Ka8 {[%emt 0:0:16]} 23. Nc7+ {[%emt 0:0:5]} Kb8 {[%emt 0:0:5]} 24. Na6+ {[%emt 0:0:3]} Ka8 {[%emt 0:0:4]} 25. Qb8+ {[%emt 0:0:2]} Rxb8 {[%emt 0:0:4]} 26. Nc7# {[%emt 0:0:2]Mate} 1-0
Interesting dynamic to this game for me ...
I'm playing against a German player.
These people are generally known for love of hearth, home, and security.
I kamikaze my bishop to start things off:
I essentially use an out-of-order King's Gambit to try to keep harassing him.
The attempt almost backfires, and gives him the opportunity to keep my queen and knight pinned to each other for more than 10 moves:
Nevertheless, he feels enough discomfort with his own king's exposure, enough compulsion for safety, that he retreats, and effectively recreates a castle for himself on the Queen side of the board ...
I should probably be explicit for any would-be chess players that know, at least, the moves of the pieces, but might need the broader strokes spelled out.
By "kamikaze" I mean exactly this:
Bishop solo-attacking the king by "crashing" into the "wall" of his future castle (ie recklessly taking the F7 pawn, knowing my far more valuable bishop will be taken in turn).
As for "queen and knight pinned to each other", that's because doing my setup out of order (look up "King's Gambit" on Wikipedia to see what the proper sequence for this opening is supposed to be), leaves me uncastled when my opponent's knight-empowered bishop comes to attack my queen.
Were I castled, my king would be moved over two spaces, and my queen would then have somewhere to escape to once we have this:
But, I'm not castled.
So unless I want to trade white queen for black bishop, as his knight will take my queen if I DO take that bishop, I have to let my white knight guard my white queen. And to some extent she does the reverse. At which point my opponent's knight is able to swoop and take a free pawn. I chase him off, but I'm at least 3 points down now. And my opponent's bishop is still essentially "holding" 2 pieces (my own knight and queen) in place.
More things of note:
1. How far my opponent's king is translated from where he wants to be (king knight's square) to where he winds up (QUEEN knight's square) before the denouement:
2. How he actually succeeds in creating a castle by that point -- note that with the ALL important exception of his rook being one square over, it is the mirror of my own castle:
3. Cost of "building" that castle in terms of development of other pieces:
Note that I have rooks that are connected, have a lot of freedom, and could "cover"/avenge one another if attacked. His are disconnected, one frozen in place by a bishop even more limited in movement, one knight essentially neutralizing pawn, bishop, and rook simultaneously.
Critical juncture.
Pawn attacks my queen, and I attack in return.
Note that, in a game where he'd been allowed normal development, my opponent probably would not be exposed to begin with, and would most likely have had a bishop that was NOT still in starting position, hemmed in by its own pawns, unable to throw my queen off into further retreat:
