Week 33: the Zukertort opening for beginners, tested from 960 to 993

Week 33 took me from 960 to 993 in 25 rapid games (14 wins, 10 losses, 1 draw), between August 19 and 24, 2024. Most of my games with White followed the same plan: 1.d4, 2.Bf4, 3.Nf3, which Chess.com labels "Zukertort Variation" or "Zukertort Chigorin". If you are looking at the Zukertort opening for beginners, this is what it looks like in real ten-minute games under 1000: the opening was the easy part, and 29 of my 40 blunders came after it.

The week in numbers

My average accuracy was 82.0 %, one of my better weeks, but I still made 40 blunders, and 29 of them came in the middlegame. With White I went 9–5; with Black, 5–5 with one draw. The rating line was a slow climb with no streak longer than three wins or two losses, which felt healthier than the swings of the previous weeks.

There is one ugly number I want to be honest about. Of my 10 losses, Chess.com records 8 as "game abandoned": I left those games instead of resigning or playing on. In six of the ten losses the engine had given me an 80 % or better chance of winning at some point. Walking away from a game I could still have saved is a habit, not a chess problem, and it shows up in this diary again and again.

The Zukertort opening for beginners: what my games actually show

I did not choose the Zukertort on purpose. I play 1.d4 and 2.Bf4 almost every game with White (13 of 14 this week), and the name Chess.com gives the game depends on what my opponent does. Against 1...d5 2...e6 it becomes the "Zukertort Variation"; against 2...Nc6 it becomes the "Zukertort Chigorin"; against other moves it can be "London System", "Indian Game" or "Horwitz Defense".

The six games with a Zukertort label ended three wins and three losses. My best game of the week was not one of them: it was game 804 against Ma_ni_shh (934), a London System where I played at 96.7 % accuracy and finished with checkmate. The point for a beginner is simple: the setup is easy to repeat, but it does not play the middlegame for you. None of the three key moments below is about opening theory; they are tactical slips at moves 11, 12 and 14.

Three moments the engine flagged

1. The en passant capture I forgot existed (game 805)

Against chessaddict1024 (972), I was slightly worse but fine. Black's queen sat on g5 and I wanted to chase it, so I pushed my h-pawn two squares.

r n b . k . n r
p . p . . . . .
. p . . p . . .
. . . p . p q .
. . . P . . p .
. N . Q P . P .
P P P . . . . P
R N . . K B . R

The move did attack the queen, but it walked right past Black's pawn on g4. En passant ("in passing") is the rule that lets a pawn capture an enemy pawn that has just jumped two squares beside it, as if it had moved only one. The engine's top reply is exactly that capture, gxh3, and its verdict changes from "slightly better for black" to "black is winning". In the game it went 14...gxh3 15.Rxh3 Rxh3 16.Bxh3 Qxg3+, and the evaluation went from -0.78 to around -7.7. The quiet Qd2 kept things at roughly -0.7. One move, one rule I had stopped thinking about.

2. Taking the bishop with check waiting for me (game 806)

With Black against sashioruganti08 (992) I was clearly better (-2.18). White's bishop had just landed on c6, attacking along the diagonal, and I took it with the pawn.

r . . . k . . r
p p p . q p . p
. b B p . . . p
. . . Q p . . .
. . . . P . . .
. . P . . b . .
P P . . . P P P
R N . . . R K .

Taking a piece back feels automatic. But after 12...bxc6, White's queen took on c6 with check, and position.py describes that reply as a double attack: check on my king and an attack on my rook in the corner, which had no defender. That is what happened in the game: 13.Qxc6+ Qd7 14.Qxa8+. The engine preferred to step the king to f8 first; its line still takes the bishop a move later and stays "clearly better for black".

3. Grabbing the pawn instead of trading knights (game 807)

Against shanumnx (939) I was clearly better with White (+1.97) and took a central pawn with my queen.

r . . q . r k .
p p p . . p p p
. . . b . . . .
. . . p . . . .
. . . P n . b .
. Q P . P N . .
P P . N . P P P
R . . . K B . R

Qxd5 looks greedy in a good way: position.py lists attacks on the knight, the bishop and the b7 pawn. But the engine's best answer for Black is Nxf2, a knight capture next to my king that "can be captured, but the line shows why it still works", and the score drops to about equal (+0.21). The simple trade Nxe4 kept "clearly better for white". I did win the game, but only on time, with about 3 seconds on my own clock, after 10 blunders and 61.5 % accuracy. That single game holds a quarter of my blunders for the week.

The lesson of the week

All three moments share one pattern: I made a move that attacked something and never asked what the move allowed. A two-square pawn push can be captured en passant. A recapture can open a diagonal to your own king. A queen that grabs a pawn leaves squares behind it. The habit I need is boring: before every capture or attack, spend five seconds on my opponent's checks and captures in the new position. The opening setup took care of itself this week; the blunder check did not.

All games this week

Previous week: week 32 · Next week: week 34 · All weeks: the journey hub · Want this for your own games? Review your own games like this.