Lichess Game of the Month: January 24

I’m really not happy with GOTM this time,

This was just a normal game of two 2000s playing chess. A game about how the knight came to g1 and he blundered checkmate on h6. I couldn’t see what was so interesting in this game

@lovlas said in #4:
You need a really high IQ to appreciate this game.

No offence but this just seems to be a very childish answer. Being a 2289, I can process basic information about the game and I didn’t really understand what was so interesting.

And what the game is being judged on? Accuracy? Then who’d play Qe8 and blunder mate? It was not a clear victory ( tho it was a decent advantage.) and black could played rh8 and fought on. If the criterion for the judgement were brilliancies and spectacular finishes, this wasn’t quite so spectacular.

No offence to the guys who played the game, just not satisfied with this GOTM and judgement by lichess.
Just see the first GOTM and compare it with this lichess.org/@/Lichess/blog/lichess-game-of-the-month-april/3SN0Jbxm

I would also like to know the criterion of the judgement.

Peace out,
Gautham

@Gautham_A said in #13:

> You need a really high IQ to appreciate this game.
>
> No offence but this just seems to be a very childish answer. Being a 2289, I can process basic information about the game and I didn’t really understand what was so interesting.

In your defence you need a really high IQ to appreciate that comment.

@Aaravgold21 said in #13:
>
very cool game can you check in next lichess game of the month

@Gautham_A said in #13:
> Just see the first GOTM and compare it with this lichess.org/@/Lichess/blog/lichess-game-of-the-month-april/3SN0Jbxm

I like how concise the commentator is, making his point in one sentence and letting the chess speak for itself, instead of writing an essay on each move. You need a really high IQ to do that.

I really enjoyed the annotations of the game, but i really don't understand the choice of this game for GOTM. Black got rolled over without throwing any punches, no special combination, nor strategic insights. It is a nice demonstration that space and central control matters but nothing special nor spectacular.

I have the same question as commentators above: what are the criteria for the choice? I see players are not grandmasters, so you don't choose top level game, it can be a 2000-s game. Should it be complicated as of tactics? Should it be educational as of openings? Should it be a good game with zero mistakes? What drives your choice and which game should I submit (other than a game played with high iq)?

Yeah, and thanks for reviewing the game. What I can say, the less resistance your opponent puts into the game, the more brilliant and strong your own play looks.I had games with almost 100% accurancy, with all 1st line moves, but the main reason is the opponent who did not play well. The stronger your opponent is, the more poor your own skills look. White's play is looking strong, completing all goals, capturing center, getting initiative, developing attack, but I guess just a couple strong moves from black, maybe d5 or e5 at the right moment, could have destroyed all beauty, making white feel uncertain and with lack of confidence.

@AkashPisharody said in #12:
> How do I access @lovlas 's annotation on the mobile website?
Three dots - analysis board
Then you see annotations

The process for deciding GOTM:

Step 1. Games are posted in a forum thread. For februar you can find it here: lichess.org/forum/general-chess-discussion/lichess-game-of-the-month-february-contest
Step 2. The team goes through the forum looking for games they find fun
Step 3. The games are voted over and a winner decided.
Step 4. The game is posted with commentary in a blogpost. The last two times I have been lucky enough to get to annotate them.

There are no objective criteria. It's just supposed to be simple harmless fun. But, if anyone has any ideas for improvements I am sure the people behind it would love to hear about it.