Skip to content

An interesting game, lightly annotated

February 19, 2014

A friend of mine passed me the score of a game he played for comment. It was pleased at a slow pace, two or three days per move, not in old fashioned correspondence style, but through an app.

For amusement, I have reviewed it with my annotations attached.


As regular readers of my chess blogs will either know of suspect, the late CJS Purdy is arguably my favourite writer. He was in my view a fine annotator of games: in one of his books, he gives the following guidance to others on how to review a game:


Purdy on how to review a chess game. Fine Art, 4, pg 144:

What was the losing move?

33 g4??: until then, the game had been a bit of yo-yo, but after black responded well to 33 g4, activating his bishop, the game was over.

How was the position just before that?

If white has played 33 d7!, black would be better, but the game would not be over.

What were the games crises?

There were several: both sides missed chances.

Did the winner miss anything?

Yes: one error was not to protect his king, by castling when he could. Secondly, he should have activated his Bd6 earlier: on d6 it is little more than a pawn, whilst on c5 it comes to life.

What of the opening?

White missed his chance after 5…Bd6, and then when white fianchettoed, his loss of a pawn (after Pd4*Pc5) gave black too much.

From → Chess

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: