Here is perhaps the most entertaining game I have ever played, as during the game black started a nasty king attack with queen, rook, bishop and pawns, I had only a pawn wall and a knight to defend, but those trusty foot-soldiers held the enemy at bay just long enough for white's king to slip out the back-door and call upon his mighty queen, powerful rook, courageous knight and pious bishop to stop the enemy from penetrating the narrow gate and eventually they succeeded in the king's defense and hence began a vicious war of vengeance, slaughtering all of the enemy's men, until the enemy king finally gave himself up!
41 ( +1 | -1 ) The mindless King hunt...It was a nice try for Black, but in the end he couldn't moblize enough force for the mate... Then after the hunt seemed to come up short... He was out of plan and in bad position... Nice and well played defense you put up there Tao... Very entertaining game... I will have to look in my notebooks of past games played... I think I remember going through a simular attack while playing the Queens Gambit as White...
37 ( +1 | -1 ) marred gameAs artifix politely pointed out, White's defense was not enough. So perhaps you should change "those trusty foot-soldiers held the enemy at bay just long enough for white's king to slip out the back-door" to "those trusty foot-soldiers held the enemy at bay just long enough for black to blunder away his full point"
53 ( +1 | -1 ) I didn't say the game was perfect.Yes, atrifix thanks for pointing out the forced win for black, but errors are made in all games of chess, and you could just as easily point out a win for white, that white missed, as well as point out the win that black missed.
So while I do fully appreciate the insight of Atrifix, I don't appreciate certainratio calling it a "marred game." Is there such a thing as un-marred game where both opponents played perfectly?? Even Kasparov misses moves.....