lichess.org
Donate

Looking for Feedback

hello,
not sure i know how to post the game but here is the FEN(i have the game starred in my profile): 1rr3k1/3bppbp/p2p1np1/q2P4/P1Q1P3/1PN1BN1P/5PP1/R4RK1 w - - 1 21

i haven't really done any analysis yet(just finished the game), but pretty excited because this is my first ever game that i'm aware of, where i had no inaccuracies, mistakes, or blunders and on top of that my opponent only had one blunder which resulted in resignation. does playing with the computer indicating no inaccuracies, mistakes, and/or blunders mean that i played the best moves that i could have? would appreciate any feedback as i don't have any or very minimal experience with engines or what these data mean. thanks!
You would better post the link to your game, or i assume that you won't get any answers.
You said you don't know how to, so:
-go back to your game
-select the search bar and copy it content
-past it here in your futur answer
I haven't managed that myself, so congratulations. That said, the game was short and mostly basic developing moves. I'm not sure of the strength of the free analysis that we get, but it seems pretty decent to me anyway. If you don't already, understand that the evaluation is in hundredths of a pawn, and that you should mostly ignore moves that change the evaluation by less than .3, since we are humans and think very differently than the computer. Often its possible to learn something from moves that change the evaluation by .4 to .7. While these moves generally don't drop material, they (if the adversary responds correctly) lead to a real change in the position that is obvious enough for an intermediate player to understand.

In your game, 12. ... rb8, disliked by the computer, seems illogical since after B4 (not played), the rook is useless there. Unlike a normal Sicillian, the pawn structure is symmetrical, so you arent really going to accomplish anything this way. I also have some concern being about how your going to address white playing E5 if you don't play it yourself. Anyway, while I'm not sure what the right answer is instead of rb8, its pretty clear that rb8 was an avoidable waste of time.

I am not sure about the PC. On the PC, people tend to get hung up on which engine is strongest, and there are a lot of free engines that don't come with interfaces, and it takes some effort to get set up. However, there are a number of free chess engines you can use on your phone that are user friendly, where you can start playing around and editing positions. The advantage of this is that you can easily see the move the engine likes instead of rb8, for example, and see how the computer would have punished rb8.
Thanks for the feedback! Art from Jersey, i presume? Yeah, i was waiting for e5 for sure and not sure what i was going to do. and for b4, i didn't even see that until going back after you pointing it out. it would only have been lose of one tempo. not sure that it is crippling in a blitz game.
Yup, from Jersey, and I agree that rb8 wasn't terrible. I was mostly pointing it out because you asked for feedback and its visibly not a good move, and I didnt really see any other clear errors.

Feel free to ask if your still unclear how the computer analysis works. I myself don't know the exact numerical +/- values that it defines as inaccuracies or blunders, but those definitions don't really matter anyway - its the + or - score that you see that reflects the computers specific evaluation. The computer might call a -.99 change one thing and a -1.01 change another, but the moves are pretty much equally bad in practice.
Not bad. Just point out, a6 in that position, not sure. The idea is fine, but I think you should carry on with depelopment first, you can play a6 later. If white opens up the center fast, sometimes you could miss those kind of tempos to castle for instance. Rb8 doesn´t make sense, in this structure, you should place your rook on the semiopen file, I mean, Rc8, and then play your plan (Na5, Nc4), but then take with the rook and keep options open in the position (b4 is always there and interesting). Later, Bb5 to "protect" c4 doesn´t look nice to me. gg
About the comp analysis, you CAN´T think in playing like an engine, (not me either), so even if you think you played a good game looking at the valorations, in my opinion this is not true 100%. The comp is good for tactics, like at the end of your game, but in the opening is not good to follow this tiny variations (+0.3 to +0.1) like the bible. It doesn´t mean anything to us humans (perhaps to GM´s), we have to think more in terms of plans and ideas.
yeah, ...rb8 wasn't good, but then again it in this game that rook turned out alright. thanks for the feedback all. much appreciated!!

This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.