Game Review 20 Jul 2026

It's So Obvious On A Screen

Time control: 15+10

Three rated games today, and overall I'm happy with how I played. I felt properly comfortable at the board, which is something I've been struggling with for a while now. Still a long way to go until my OTB play matches my online level though, and the forks in this post say that clearly. Looking at them again on a screen, they're obvious, it's like you can see the whole position at once. It's strange how my brain doesn't connect with a real board the same way it does with one on a screen yet. Comfort's improving. The vision gap hasn't closed.

Game 1: v nuon76, Pseudo Queen's Indian, Win

I played White. The cleanest game of the day by a distance, two inaccuracies and nothing worse.

13. Be4?! Inaccuracy, lost 1.27 pawns
In this position I was a little unsure of what to do, I was a little worried about Black's light squared bishop. My thought here was I'm happy to trade off the bishops, and if they play d5, that blocks the bishop's path anyway. The threat didn't seem like it was really there, so I could have brought my rook to f1 or even moved my queen to g3.
Worth noting, the two moves I actually considered while thinking, Rf1 and Qg3, are exactly the ones the engine also likes here. The instinct was right, I just talked myself out of it and played the safer trade instead.
When a candidate move you've already spotted keeps nagging at you, that's usually worth listening to rather than defaulting to the comfortable option.
17. Ndf3?! Inaccuracy, lost 1.90 pawns
This is my second inaccuracy of the game. My aim is to bring my knight in to back up my other knight on e5. The engine prefers Rf1, as there's a tactic to trap the queen. I spot this tactic a couple of moves later.
Missing the trap in the moment but catching it two moves later is still real progress, board vision arriving a beat behind the engine's timing rather than not arriving at all.

Really happy with this game, 95 percent accuracy and only two inaccuracies. If only this was the norm, not an anomaly.

Game 2: v Raj1_chess, Ruy Lopez Exchange, Loss

I played Black. Two mistakes decided this one, one a genuine thinking error, the other not really a chess mistake at all.

5...Be6 Opening deviation, lost 1.81 pawns
My first inaccuracy of the game, I was looking at Qd4, which is the engine's preferred move, but I didn't think it worked. I just played safe. Looking through it with the engine afterwards, it actually works quite well and White has to be careful.
Qd4 looks alarming to play over the board, walking the queen out early into an open position, but the tactics protect it in practice. Be6 developing normally felt safer, but safety wasn't really the question being asked.
13...Qd6?? Critical moment, lost 7.49 pawns, walked into a fork
Here's my big mistake, I can't believe I blundered this fork, I moved too quickly, and I just didn't see it. I was thinking more about White's rook coming to d1 to attack the queen and looking at how I can protect it. Qc5 was a much better move, as it would have pinned the knight to the queen.
Same failure as elsewhere today, focused entirely on the threat already visible, the rook coming to d1, and missed a completely different threat sitting one move away. Qc5 actually solves the exact problem being worried about and avoids the fork at the same time, it does both jobs at once.
15...Rb8?? Decisive, an equipment slip rather than a thinking error
This is a massive blunder, but it was actually the e-board version of a mouse slip. Sometimes when you move a piece on the Chessnut Move it registers a square as you move the piece, if you move too slowly, Rxh8 is what I was meant to play. I have now changed the settings so my moves don't register until I hit the clock. I was completely losing anyway, but I would have played on without this slip, as fighting losing positions can be quite fun.
Worth separating this out from everything else in the post, it's not a thinking error at all, it's a hardware quirk. Already fixed with a settings change, so it shouldn't cost another game.
If you're playing on an e-board, check exactly how and when it registers a move. A slow physical movement can register the wrong square before your hand's even left the piece.

Game 3: v Arjunr08, Queen's Pawn Chigorin, Win

I played White. A good decision undone almost immediately by a bad one, then rescued by the opponent returning the favour.

15. c5?? Critical moment, lost 2.24 pawns, walked into a fork
My opponent offered me a draw on move 13, I obviously declined as I was clearly winning. I immediately blunder a fork and hand them a win instead. Another fork that I didn't see, my intent was to always attack with c5 when ready, I didn't even look at e4, I was just assuming they'd take the pawn. I do know that in this opening you must stop Black playing e5, I guess now I know first hand why.
Declining the draw was the right call, the mistake wasn't that decision, it was executing a plan on autopilot straight afterwards. c5 had been the plan for several moves, so it got played the moment it became available rather than being rechecked against what had actually changed on the board in the meantime.

I'm not happy that I blundered yet another fork, but I keep fighting and spotted my own fork after my opponent hung a pawn, they missed the fork and from there it was a straightforward game.

Three games, one recurring gap

Two forks walked into today, one equipment slip, and one genuinely clean game in between. The comfort at the board is real progress, and worth acknowledging on its own. The forks are the next specific thing to work on, not board vision in general, but that exact pattern, a plan or a worry occupying all the attention while something else quietly develops on the board. Screen chess never lets that happen unnoticed. Real chess still does.

Follow the journey

Join Inter Mezzo Sporting Club

Join the club, play in the league, and follow the Road to NM journey as it unfolds.

Join