I'm cheekily presuming that the free introductory month counts as a paid sub for the purposes of game of the week :-) This is a recent game and although I won, it was only due to a late game oversight from my opponent. I am particularly interested in whether you think I could have played the middlegame strategy focussing on the e4 square more incisively, or whether I should have done something entirely different. It felt to me like I was doing ok, but not really winning, until my opponent's big error (after which I think I did a pretty good job of mopping up). https://lichess.org/TF7iPddxgRKE
Here is my submission for Game of the Week. It was from one of my OTB games from this summer and I think it shows a nice struggle between material vs active piece play. Im pretty proud of it, even though I lost.
Thanks for the analysis Nate. I burnt a lot of time on move 23 - you have a really interesting observation on play ‘no move’ at that point. At the end I was down on time and had a memory of being outplayed by my opponent in a time scramble the previous season so when the draw was offered I decided to call it a day - the outside h pawn was creating a few ghosts in my head. I felt I had messed the position up and was feeling a bit tired too (I am no longer young!) so was not ready with the mental toughness required to press on.
It was an OTB league game (90+30) played on Monday. First time playing the Nimzovich Sicilian from your course OTB. My opponent accepted a draw under severe time pressure, but the position is winning for him. I found it difficult to open up the position and find the correct middle game lines.
As an aside note, it was an interesting experience to play against a blind player. He had a small separate board he could touch, and we said the moves to each other. He recorded the moves in Braille (first time I've seen that done).
up to move 10 is a Shankland recommendation - but then White plays dynamically to stop the standard plan. Move 16 for black is what interests me most and the idea of what "commitments" certain openings require.
I can never decide if my discomfort in games like this should be a spur to deeper study or not...
I'm cheekily presuming that the free introductory month counts as a paid sub for the purposes of game of the week :-) This is a recent game and although I won, it was only due to a late game oversight from my opponent. I am particularly interested in whether you think I could have played the middlegame strategy focussing on the e4 square more incisively, or whether I should have done something entirely different. It felt to me like I was doing ok, but not really winning, until my opponent's big error (after which I think I did a pretty good job of mopping up). https://lichess.org/TF7iPddxgRKE
It's all good.
https://lichess.org/study/IemV6nTr
Here is my submission for Game of the Week. It was from one of my OTB games from this summer and I think it shows a nice struggle between material vs active piece play. Im pretty proud of it, even though I lost.
Thanks Nate for another instructive game and explaining subtle things.
Key lessons / takeaways for me:
- Play on the Queen side idea [12...Nc5 instead of Bc5]
- Forcing move vs calm ones converting the position at 23rd Black's move.
Technical question - if my game wasn't picked up this week is it still a candidate for next weeks? Or does each week start from fresh?
Starts fresh
Thanks for the analysis Nate. I burnt a lot of time on move 23 - you have a really interesting observation on play ‘no move’ at that point. At the end I was down on time and had a memory of being outplayed by my opponent in a time scramble the previous season so when the draw was offered I decided to call it a day - the outside h pawn was creating a few ghosts in my head. I felt I had messed the position up and was feeling a bit tired too (I am no longer young!) so was not ready with the mental toughness required to press on.
Indeed! What does yours say?
I totally understand! But we need that point 💪
The inner dialogue is a battle in itself …😂
https://lichess.org/study/B13SfT5j/0Jg5yXcm
Very instructive, thank you, Nate.
Here's my submission for a future game review: https://lichess.org/study/rAqmTu5q/7JUxg077
It was an OTB league game (90+30) played on Monday. First time playing the Nimzovich Sicilian from your course OTB. My opponent accepted a draw under severe time pressure, but the position is winning for him. I found it difficult to open up the position and find the correct middle game lines.
As an aside note, it was an interesting experience to play against a blind player. He had a small separate board he could touch, and we said the moves to each other. He recorded the moves in Braille (first time I've seen that done).
The sound from the video is quite low. I checked my settings and everything seems ok.
Thank you for another interesting game review Nate.
I submit my OTB tournament game from yesterday below.
I won the game, but I might have been a bit lucky to do so.
[Event "Horsens Skakforenings åbne klubmesterskab 2025"]
[Date "2025.10.28"]
[White "Eskildsen, Tommy"]
[Black "Rasmussen, Troels"]
[Result "0-1"]
[WhiteElo "1854"]
[BlackElo "1817"]
[TimeControl "90+30"]
[Variant "Standard"]
[ECO "B10"]
[Opening "Caro-Kann Defense"]
[StudyName "Klassiske partier"]
[ChapterName "vs. Tommy Eskildsen, Klubmesterskab 2025"]
[ChapterURL "https://lichess.org/study/sgqhspWo/2ohGnepQ"]
[Annotator "https://lichess.org/@/DSTRR"]
1. e4 c6 2. Ne2 d5 3. e5 c5 4. d4 cxd4 5. Nxd4 Nc6 6. Nxc6 bxc6 7. Bd3 e6 8. O-O Ne7 9. Bg5 Qb6 10. b3 c5 11. c3 Ba6 12. Be3 Bxd3 13. Qxd3 Nf5 14. Nd2 Be7 15. Bf4 g5 16. Bg3 h5 17. h4 g4 18. c4 Rd8 19. Qc2 Bxh4 20. Bxh4 Nxh4 21. cxd5 exd5 22. Rac1 Rc8 23. Rfe1 Qe6 24. Re2 Nf3+ 25. Kf1 Nd4 26. Qd3 Nxe2 27. Qxe2 a6 28. Qe3 Qe7 29. Qc3 Rh6 30. f4 h4 31. Kg1 h3 32. g3 Qb7 33. Qd3 Rd8 34. Kh2 Qb6 35. Rf1 Qb5 36. Qxb5+ axb5 37. Rc1 Ra6 38. Rc2 c4 39. Nf1 d4 40. bxc4 bxc4 41. Rf2 c3 42. Rc2 Rb8 0-1
Hi Nate
Thanks for the new initiatives.
I have been thinking about this Semi-Slav game.
https://lichess.org/Ow4QgpVvr4Cs
up to move 10 is a Shankland recommendation - but then White plays dynamically to stop the standard plan. Move 16 for black is what interests me most and the idea of what "commitments" certain openings require.
I can never decide if my discomfort in games like this should be a spur to deeper study or not...
perhaps too philosophical for a Game of the Week!