Man those first two games really show the GM/IM gap. Rosen's 20 years younger, better prepped, and gets great positions out of the opening but Ben puts up a super resilient defense and outplays him in the endgame
@@ahha2523 That's arguably damned risky to try vs. Finegold when you're at a time disadvantage though. His endgame technique is significantly better than his raw calculation power (which isn't uncommon amongst older grandmasters), and he has many endgame swindles.
@@vigilante8374 yeah that’s fair, but it’s still objectively correct play to convert the position into a winning endgame. Eric doesn’t just struggle with this again Ben, it’s a general problem of his. But hey, I’m just a lowly 1600
I like how drama-free Eric Rosen is and how while Ben isn't fully above all the drama, he's usually calling out the folks who start drama and defending the folks that don't. While Ben has insult comic style humor without generally meaning real offense, Eric has this slight playful mischievous sense of humor. Different enough, but definitely both flavors of chess player that I enjoy.
Many years ago when i first saw ben on youtube i just though he was kind of an ass. But he really grew on me. Hes a funny guy once you understand how his humor works
I watched Ben's RU-vid after the games. I'm amazed that these positions can be repeated and analyzed so deeply. In the second game, Eric is saying "he'd looked at this positon before" after 16 moves. I'm lucky to remember first five moves of an opening.
In the first two games you played better and you should’ve won both. At winning positions (+5 eval) you kept losing time when your first thought move was the best, but you weren’t confident and maybe intimidated by the opponent.
Ben has more experience playing losing positions than most grandmasters. He almost never plays for an opening advantage, but for complications. And he never resigns, because he can win dead lost positions.
Said this before but it seems like Eric’s biggest enemy at the minute is his time management. First game got squeezed for time and I’ve seen it a lot in his TT matches.
I may disagree - depending on how you view my point. I think the issue id that Eric has great strengths in the opening/middlegame (when there are lots of pieces on the board and chances for tactical vision). He had advantages in every game (even the old game he recapped) and it hurt to watch him lose them. The problem is that his accuracy drops when pieces come off the board in converting and thats the only stage of the game where he still looks like an IM instead of a GM. More time would help with deep calculations of every move but the issue isnt the *time itself* per se, but practicing thinking through end games so that his intuition of the proper moves comes more rapidly. It makes a lot of sense seeing as how younger kids win games early and only level out when they meet their matches and have to work on an aspect of their game (true of any sport). Lots of late game calculations and deep prep and practice against high level opponents would up his late game and he’d reach GM status. You can see its been improving with his better play lately (i think he’ll hit an all time high in rating if he keep playing OTB this year) but basically learning how to convert a +1 or +1.5 position against a GM that is going to fight every second and continuously make the best move is what he needs. As soon as that happens regularly, he’ll be a GM. It seems backwards to be able to calculate better with more pieces but in a lot of ways theres more wiggle room. Playing for mild advantages and “leaning on” your opponent will get him to that next level.
@@MyBiPolarBearMax I more or less agree with everything you said but want to add that endgame is about a lot more than "calculation", which is why the term "technique" is used so often regarding the endgame. It's about long term plans and intuition, but also knowing a ton of specific patterns and rules by heart.
@@nazarenoalmiron526 No. If you know that the current position is or will lead to e.g. the Lucena position or the Philidor position then you know for 100% certain what the outcome will be if both players play correctly. "Intuition" specifically refers to situations with a lack of certainty, a lack of specificity.
At 19:32, after white's rook to F1, i think i spot queen sack to take white's Knight, then when black queen takes back, black's rook takes white's rook on F1, with check, so then King to A2 would still enable the rook sack and fork, otherwise if queen to C1, rook takes and king recaptures. And black is up? I'm very much an amateur but seems to work! Beautiful game btw.. Edited to add, funnily enough you explained the very line the next second from where i paused to check that line :D Well, at least i found it on my own! I think guys like you and Ben are really good to watch, in terms of upgrading's one's chess repertoire!
I would’ve never thought I would’ve seen this collab come, I hear about you talk about Ben Finegold all the time in your videos and only watched some of Bens videos, so to see you guys play chess and analyze it is so cool ‼️ glad you got to play him and I’m looking forward to the rest of the video
first game: attacking 4 pieces with 3 pieces..where is the logic in that? took WAY too long to get the f1 rook into the game. Glad to see a player as good as Eric make beginner level mistakes
