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
|33.p14 was a complete blunder and of course a mistake. I mean, I had the game at that position:-)
I want to explore whether that's an accurate assessment. I thought the game was still competitive at that point.
39.u20 40.r21 41.s19 42.t22 43.v22 44.v23 45.w24
mc
33.n17 34.n20 35.p18 36.q23 37.s21 38.t20 39.t19 40.s22
ends with a move for black, and I thought (incorrectly) that you were demonstrating a win for black, but accidentally referred to white; therefore, I offered an improvement on move 39 to demonstrate a complete win for black (39. u20 instead of 39. t19). I guess at issue then is whether, after 33. n17 , there exists a way for black to win, but admittedly this does not look good.
I restate what I said months ago, in my opinion and analysis, these games are games between humans, who do not always play 'perfect' moves. The fact that white missed an improvement does not change the result, and I don't really see a point in beating the issue to death. Black won. Next game. I would not wish to spoil the 'fun' however, of post game analysis, if that's what you all enjoy; maybe there is something to learn, but the next game will be a different game, with BRAND NEW MISTAKES to be made. A famous Chess player remarked that the winner of the game is the player who makes the 2nd-to-last mistake. That's how I see it. mc.
If that works, I still didn't prove that |33.n17 works, but that is still my hypothesis.