I know the game isn't perfect and I definitely butchered the opening quite a bit. In fairness this was a rapid game and my opponent failed to capitalize on his opportunities as well which means he didn't find the refutation either. I just picked the game up a year ago and I'm making pretty good progress I think.
I've analyzed with the engine and seen why certain moves don't work, in particular my worst move of the game 11. h3? which I thought would kick the knight, but instead is just a bad move positionally as the position of my queen allows black to stick his pieces down my throat by exploiting tempo gaining moves against the queen, even though he can't win material immediately. It was also a mistake to allow him to get in ...Ng4, which I felt was annoying already during the game. The computer confirms black is better in that position, and I could feel it too, as there was no particularly good answer besides that awkward queen move.
But I'm still really proud of my play from move 14 onwards, especially the final tactical sequence leading to a mating attack. I found the exchange sacrifice 23. Rxf6! to blast his king open, leading to mate, correctly assessing that black's potential passed a-pawn and the eventual possibility of a check along the 1st rank was no concern. I also am impressed with myself that I found and played 18. Qc5! almost on instinct, not really consciously realizing how strong of a move it was. I didn't realize until after the game just how devastating my apparently simple pawn-winning tactic of 20. Nxb5! really was, either. For some reason my opponent played ...cxb5? and I grabbed the free queen, and I still have trouble explaining why he would have made that choice. Time trouble, perhaps, and he wanted to resolve the complications? Hilariously, the computer doesn't even consider cxb5 a mistake, but it did make my job easier.
Another thing I'm proud of was my time management. I usually suck at that. In classical games I overthink and run my clock down dangerously low. Even if I win, I usually have only 1 or 2 minutes while my opponent has often barely used any time. I've historically been garbage at blitz chess and am still garbage at bullet, with 300-400 point Elo differences between my fast and slow chess ratings. This time I had plenty of time while it was my opponent who ran his clock down and even flagged, although he was just getting mated anyway. I like to think I'm slowly improving at making moves based on instinct and positional understanding rather than pure calculation.
lichess.org/embed/9bijivNi
I've analyzed with the engine and seen why certain moves don't work, in particular my worst move of the game 11. h3? which I thought would kick the knight, but instead is just a bad move positionally as the position of my queen allows black to stick his pieces down my throat by exploiting tempo gaining moves against the queen, even though he can't win material immediately. It was also a mistake to allow him to get in ...Ng4, which I felt was annoying already during the game. The computer confirms black is better in that position, and I could feel it too, as there was no particularly good answer besides that awkward queen move.
But I'm still really proud of my play from move 14 onwards, especially the final tactical sequence leading to a mating attack. I found the exchange sacrifice 23. Rxf6! to blast his king open, leading to mate, correctly assessing that black's potential passed a-pawn and the eventual possibility of a check along the 1st rank was no concern. I also am impressed with myself that I found and played 18. Qc5! almost on instinct, not really consciously realizing how strong of a move it was. I didn't realize until after the game just how devastating my apparently simple pawn-winning tactic of 20. Nxb5! really was, either. For some reason my opponent played ...cxb5? and I grabbed the free queen, and I still have trouble explaining why he would have made that choice. Time trouble, perhaps, and he wanted to resolve the complications? Hilariously, the computer doesn't even consider cxb5 a mistake, but it did make my job easier.
Another thing I'm proud of was my time management. I usually suck at that. In classical games I overthink and run my clock down dangerously low. Even if I win, I usually have only 1 or 2 minutes while my opponent has often barely used any time. I've historically been garbage at blitz chess and am still garbage at bullet, with 300-400 point Elo differences between my fast and slow chess ratings. This time I had plenty of time while it was my opponent who ran his clock down and even flagged, although he was just getting mated anyway. I like to think I'm slowly improving at making moves based on instinct and positional understanding rather than pure calculation.
lichess.org/embed/9bijivNi