Enclosed is a copy of a game that I played with a friend. I would greatly appreciate it if you would critically evaluate our play. In particular, as Black, I played for the strategical aim of a good knight versus bad bishop ending.
Was this a good idea, given the middlegame position? In addition, was my knight sacrifice for two pawns in the endgame the most expedient way of winning?
My friend is currently unrated. I wonder if you could give some estimate as to our current playing strength, based on your extensive tournament experience.
Joseph Krasovsky
Union NJ
* * * * * * * * * * *
Rather than give the game in its entirety, since it is quite lengthy (121 moves!), I have set up the critical position after White's 60th move where Black could have won immediately.
You missed 60...b4!, winning the pinned bishop. White can try 61.Qxa6 bxc3 62.Qxc6, but after 62...c2 Black will soon have an extra queen.
Your plan of exchanging queens, winning the a5 pawn, and then sacrificing the knight for the c5 and d4 pawns was also good enough although much longer.
I would estimate that both you and your friend are Class D players. But it is difficult to say, based on only one game.
{This article originally appeared in the September-October 1990 issue of Atlantic Chess News. Searching today at the USCF website, I find that Joseph Krasovsky of New York stopped playing chess in 1997. His final rating was 1290, or Class D.}
