Day 424: Playing chess every day until I reach a 2000 rating
Vložit
- čas přidán 29. 06. 2024
- Watch out Hikaru Nakamura and Magnus Carlsen! I'm coming for you!
This is another day in my quest for a 2000 rating on chess.com.
Vienna Game: Falkbeer, Vienna GambitJoin our discord to chat about my journey and see others chat about theirs: / discord
#chess - Hry
Ahhh..Your hat was upside down in the opening.. No one else will probably notice.
No one exactly
Hahahah!!! Thanks for noticing Milton!!
I noticed it
I think you played well in this game. Early f-pawn pushes are tricky.
Best intro yet. Had me flipping my phone haha
😂😂😂
LOL, monologue about comment section yelling at you was a self fulfilling prophecy
The first six moves of your opening were spot on. But in each opening there are themes of course. In the Vienna white can often attack on f7 but black can sometimes play Qh4+. It's the same in the King's Gambit. So here - 3:21 - I think you should notice that black has Qh4+ and probably play Nf3 (or even better Qg4). Again, I think it is that board vision thing again. You were focussed on Bd3 but you have to consider whether your opponent has any forcing moves.
However, believe it or not this is a well known trap. After Qh4+. g3, Nxf3+ white is at least +2. But it is a very tactical position and hard to find the right moves. It will be interesting to see your analysis.
To be fair with this line it is a situation where knowing a bit more of the opening may help.
tough game!! keep going dude!! im rooting for you!
Enjoyed the game, you will get em next time.
Keep trucking
Around the move at 5:17, I think the move Rg1 would have solved your issue (haven't finished watching yet). I see you picked that up in the Analyze later. Anyway after that it looked like you may have gotten back in it, never give up never surrender! See you next game.
Didn’t you have the Queen trapped with Be4?
Great intro Patrick
I’m 100% behind anyone trying to accomplish anything, so don’t take this the wrong way. Playing a game (or 10) per day with limited studying (an hour or less per day) will make it virtually impossible to reach a 2000 online rating, which would be ~1600 otb. That’s not my opinion, it’s Hikaru’s opinion. You may have another 100-200 points you can gain (according to him), but 2000 isn’t going to happen, and it’s mostly due to your age.
There’s a dude about your age playing and studying ~8 hours/day. He’s capped out at about 1700. Hikaru contends that’s his limit.
Keep plugging away…. I’m watching and rooting for you.
Tyler1 is 1920 and peak is 1960 he's on a long break now but once he's back he'll be 2000 easily
@@KingPanda-lp5irI never said Tyler1 wouldn’t get to 2000, but Hikaru said he’s peaked, especially given his study regimen.
You were upside down. 😂😂
Again you lose because of lack of tactics and board vision NOT opening preparation, if you have limited study time do NOT study openings
Totally disagree. Patrick is losing after the first 10 moves due to lack of opening knowledge which he admits and plans to address.
Studying openings is not just a matter of learning six or seven moves, it’s a matter of having depth of knowledge to tackle all possibilities and more importantly, how the opening leads to a middle game plan for winning chances. I feel the only openings Patrick has a clear middle game plan are the Vienna gambit and Grand prix attack on the sicilian. This is an area that needs improving.
I would recommend him studying in depth the opening he already knows, then basic knowledge of a few common ones, all with the middle game in mind.
@@jamesmcavoy5440 Except that does not tie up with this game or the last few games he has played does it?
He did NOT lose this game because he lost out of the opening he even had a substantial advantage he just did not have the tactical ability to follow it up .. he has very little study time, openings are a tiny bit of the game tactics a massive under pinning, he has lost 10 games missing tactics for every lost opening .. so WHY tell him to study openings?
@steve.k4735 I agree with you. At the sub 2000 level players generally don't know opening theory. The ones that make it to 2000 are good at chess fundamentals, tactics, and limiting blunders. Not studying tons of openings. I watch Patrick's games and the ones he loses are for the most part due to getting outplayed in the middle/endgame.
Thanks you for the feedback! Ahhh but if I can get more confidence in the opening, maybe that will give me more time in the middle game?
@@chesswithpatrick Patrick we are trying to help (I got to 2000 OTB) nearly everyone is saying don't spend the little time you have studying openings, you can choose to listen OR you can make up reasons why its a good idea.
Study chess puzzles BUT do the same ones over and over again, WHY because if you cant `solve` a puzzle you did yesterday instantly just by looking at it then its not in your deep memory and if its not that deep in there you will not see it at the board, I got to being able to do about 800 puzzles in a hour to get to 2000, because I could `see` the solution in seconds, then I could see it in my games.
Same puzzles day in day out in say 30 minutes you will add more and more as you `solve` them faster SAME ONES
Poor game Patrick 🤷
@@MarcelFuret Nah. He played well after recovering from the trap.
I keep saying board vision but you lost this game to unfamiliarity to a common opening trap. You seemed to get it after Nf3 but then decided for that one move knight g5 threat and essentially threw the game. Board vision played a huge role later when you got the game competitive again. I hope this game was instructive for you!
Gg...😊
Look back at move 6. You had a fork on his knight and the g7 pawn. With routine play you could have come away with a won game. It’s not pawn grabbing to go for the fork. He still messed up enough to let you back in the game but poor time management proved your undoing. The Vienna is a good opening but when you gambit the pawn you have to be able to take full advantage of.
Qf3 is all you have so don't waste any more time. You did the best of a mistake in the opening, and will be down the exchange, but that is still playable.
Oh, I get it, like the other day you were talking about studying the opening. you play c4 since you want dark squared bishop on c3 via d4. also, c4 stops d5 from black.
c4, c4, it's explosive. then when you finally play c4, oh no you had Rxh6+. Isn't chess great?
In analysis not Bf1 simply 10, Qe2 your own computer says. and h6 11. Bd2, followed by 0-0-0.
Btw I like Bd4 better and it's -0.17. point being it takes that diagonal, and you never even considered trying to get it on that diagonal, the most powerful one, in this case, and in many others. Even your analysis told you to move it there, you grabbed the white squared bishop first. People talk about your blind spots. This is an example.
Pieces on their best squared, piece harmony, pieces working together.
Then you win 2 pawns with an attack. Perhaps not winning but hard to lose.
Even with 7 seconds left why not just make a move… why let the time go to zero? Move a pawn… should have moved them earlier the rooms were blocked in.
In the beginning moving the rook to G1 solves all the problems FYI.
You need some help understanding what you should do vs what you don’t need to do. You’re not really improving and winning a game when opponent blunders doesn’t help you in any way to achieve your goal of 2000.
Yep, rook to G1 results in entirely different game. King safety
Thankfully I view on iPad 🤣💀