Move sequences are automatically highlighted and made clickable. If the previous move number appears earlier in the comment, the sequence continues from that move. Otherwise, it's treated as a variation from the main line. This can be error-prone with multiple sequences in one comment, so please use the Preview button to check your work before posting.
To force a sequence to be treated as a main line variation, precede it with a vertical bar
(|). The copy variation button (⧉) includes this bar automatically.
For more complex discussions, you can name a sequence by adding the name in square
brackets at the end, e.g. 15.p9 [a]. Later in the same comment, or in
any following comment, you can branch off that variation by wrapping the name in vertical
bars, like this:|a| 16.o13
The variation name must start with
a letter, contain only letters, numbers, and dashes (-), and is case-sensitive.
Comments use UTF-8 encoding, so you can include emojis 😉, non-English characters, and other Unicode symbols.
You can also use HTML entities like — for an em-dash (—) or → for a right arrow (→).
For safety reasons, most HTML tags are stripped, except:
<b>, <i>, <u> — bold, italic, underline<em>, <strong> — emphasis, strong text<s>, <strike> — <sup>, <sub> — superscript, subscript<blockquote> — indented quotes
<code> — fixed-width font<pre> — multi-line preformatted text
<br> — forces a line break
|22.i3 23.i4 24.h5 25.k5 26.k2 27.o3 28.m3 29.q12 30.r5
The line I missed was |28.f5 29.j2 30.h6 31.j6
White had a relatively easy win with |29.i16 instead of L15.
White still could have won with |31.o18 instead of M17.
If |43.e21 44.g19 45.h18 46.i15.
If |61.s16 62.r15 63.r14 64.o12
What I had worried about with |31.o18 instead of M17 was something like |31.o18 32.p20 33.p21 34.n19 35.q19 36.o17 37.p16 38.n15 39.q14 40.o12, which looked like a black win. In retrospect |31.o18 32.p20 33.m17 would have solved that problem.
Where white chose 47.f15, the other option would have been |47.f17 48.i15, but Black could win with |47.f17 48.i15 49.e15 50.f12 51.f11 52.e14
David comments: If |61.s16 62.r15 63.r14 64.o12
I would have taken that option if I had thought black would respond that way, because it looked like 65.v5 66.u8 67.q6 68.q3 69.s5 70.v3 71.u3 72.t2 73.s2 might lead to a white win from that setup. The move that worried me, and deterred me from talking |61.s16, was 62.r13. From there, I could not see a way for white to break through to the center group of white links for a win.
|31.o18 32.p20 33.p21 34.n19 35.m17 was winning for white.
After |61.s16 62.r13 63.r14 64.q16 65.s12 66.o12 it looks pretty much the same as the game.
|61.s16 62.r15 63.r14 64.o12 65.v5 66.u8 67.q6 68.q3 69.s5 70.t4 71.u3 72.u6 73.u7 74.s7 looks like an easy win for black.