Very happy with my game - any great insights for me?

I'm really happy with this game! Too bad my opponent blundered his rook in the endgame, leading to him resigning. Unusually accurate game for me.

You were of course already a rook up so the endgame wasn't interesting and your opponent could have resigned earlier. 14...Ne4! was a good winning shot. That's the sort of tactical trick for which it's good to keep an eye open, and all the more credit if you spotted it before playing 12...Bb2 and 13...Bxc3, which I guess you did indeed because otherwise you would not have given up the good dark-squared bishop.

I saw the 14... Ne4 before playing 11... Ba3. The fork was mostly to get the queen trade and kinda hope chess that he would play 16. Rbc1 ( which I calculated to be likely given our elo and his general play ) so I could win the rook before taking the bishop back with 18... Kxd8.

That sequence is probably the best sequence I have calculated ever.

I wonder if there are more valuable lessons to be learned from the games you lose than the ones you win!

@derkleineJo said in #4:

I wonder if there are more valuable lessons to be learned from the games you lose than the ones you win!

Most definitely. But there are less bragging rights, and I was overly excited about this.

he paid for his chess aggression , wanted to strike, but haven't thought of that can lead to fork , I know such cases

@franksgambits said in #3:

I saw the 14... Ne4 before playing 11... Ba3. The fork was mostly to get the queen trade and kinda hope chess that he would play 16. Rbc1 ( which I calculated to be likely given our elo and his general play ) so I could win the rook before taking the bishop back with 18... Kxd8.

You should never play hope chess. However, in this case it is not hope chess, because even if he had played Rb2, you can still just take the bishop and win a piece.

Edit: Actually there is one situation where hope chess is acceptable. If you are dead lost anyway, you might as well play a tricky but suboptimal move and hope to swindle them.

@AsDaGo said in #7:

You should never play hope chess. However, in this case it is not hope chess, because even if he had played Rb2, you can still just take the bishop and win a piece.

Exactly. The tactic was viable without the second fork, or I wouldn't have gone for it. The second part of the sequence was just a bonus. I usually prefer endgames, so trading the queens and pushing through with my pawns on the queen side was a reasonable tactic. I also deliberately made my queenside pawn moves with this in mind from the start, so I figured I was ready to take him on after the exchanges.

It feels great when your play just works.

@franksgambits said in #8:

Exactly. The tactic was viable without the second fork, or I wouldn't have gone for it. The second part of the sequence was just a bonus.

Oh, ok, I thought you only played it because of the fork. In that case, well done and good calculation! I'm sure you'll improve very quickly.

@AsDaGo said in #9:

Oh, ok, I thought you only played it because of the fork. In that case, well done and good calculation! I'm sure you'll improve very quickly.

I originally put my bishop there to go for a fork and figured that if he tries to pin my knight, I could go for that sequence - hoping for the second fork if he played Rbc1. It was not a typical calculation by me though. Hence the post about how happy I am with my game.

I'm trying, but I am in no rush. And I don't have much time to play. I'm absolute trash at shorter time controls as well..