https://lichess.org/lsHs0tZd/white#5
Move 3 is a blunder. Shouldn’t it be more of a mistake? I mean I am not really losing any important piece or my king’s safety so why this is a blunder?
You go from winning with 3 dxe5 to losing 3 e3?? e4.
Yep, it's not a blunder (more inaccurate engine terminology).
@tpr said [^](/forum/redirect/post/GGGWhN7T)
> You go from winning with 3 dxe5 to losing 3 e3?? e4.
That's like answering the question "Why does Fermat's Last Theorem hold?" with "Because there are no integer solutions to the equation a^n + b^n = c^n for n > 2."
You could have won a pawn for free, but you went for a very bad version of a reverse French defense instead. 3...e4 would have locked both of your bishops out of the game for the foreseeable future. In a structure like this, you'd want to play 4. c4, 5. Nc3, 6. Qb3 to put pressure on black's pawn on d5, but this being Chess960, you can only achieve c4 and Bb3 - it would take you 4 moves to put a knight on c3.
It is a blunder. 3 dxe5 would have won. You are up a central pawn, a queen to be. Losing a central pawn for no compensation is like the long term loss of a queen. The loss of a wing pawn is not as severe as a central pawn. You can have compensation for a pawn, e.g. 3 tempi for development, but here there is no compensation at all.
3 e3?? e4 would have completely locked you, as indicated above. As you need indeed 4 moves to put a knight on c3, you lost 3 tempi, the equivalent of a pawn, enough to lose the game.
...to summarise, take the free pawn.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.