Re: CryptoNote technical discussion and Chess Challenge
Guys, why do you think on exchanging when you have a better positional move?
In that line of game, after 31.Nxb7 Rd5 (Rxd5), 32.Rd1 is a bad move precisely because it weakens our position and strengthen blacks, so why would we even considered it? Instead, we could play 32.Rc1 to control that open column and give our Knight the chance to go to c5 and then to e6. If you check the position after 32.Rc1, we are 1 pawn up, and our Rooks have more range of maneuvering.
Same thing happened with the Queens exchange, which was another unnecessary exchange that weakened our position very bad.
Like I said, we better start analyzing our position with better moves for us, not just better moves for black
In that line of game, after 31.Nxb7 Rd5 (Rxd5), 32.Rd1 is a bad move precisely because it weakens our position and strengthen blacks, so why would we even considered it? Instead, we could play 32.Rc1 to control that open column and give our Knight the chance to go to c5 and then to e6. If you check the position after 32.Rc1, we are 1 pawn up, and our Rooks have more range of maneuvering.
Same thing happened with the Queens exchange, which was another unnecessary exchange that weakened our position very bad.
Like I said, we better start analyzing our position with better moves for us, not just better moves for black
Well initially my idea was Rc1:
Yes, Nd3, indeed. I am not sure that those exchanges favor us for as far as I could calculate.
My idea is that if we open up the c-file we can move our Rook there.
My idea is that if we open up the c-file we can move our Rook there.
But let's say we play Rc1. Now black could respond with Ra5 and then we may have to place that same Rook on d1 anyway, right?
Nxd6: 2 votes (GoldTiger69, boolberry)
Rd1: 3 votes (Morecoin, languagehasmeaning, tifozi)
I agree that things went wrong somewhere because we lost the initiative. This game is not over but we are far from winning.