Nice game, however i would have to agree with achja. That bishop was a good, practical attacking piece and trading it would not have been good tactically... MAYBE positionally since you can keep the position closed and make a fool out of the bishops with your extra knight but still an impractical choice, especially in a blitz game.
My lowest centipawn loss would probably be this game:
http://en.lichess.org/FIWKmjWK/white#0
I find it quite easy to have a low centipawn loss in the english opening just because you can play 20 thematic moves that are all decent. One of my funniest games is this: http://en.lichess.org/FRbiPr41/white#0
I feel however that a low centipawn loss is just as or more important than innaccuracies because whilst mistakes and blunders can easily cost a game, an innaccuracy generally just prolongs it and most of the time the innaccuracy is because of insane depth computer calculation. E.g. http://en.lichess.org/Vj3rrCYk/black#0
But nothing beats a good swashbuckling blunder galore mess of a crazy attack that ends in a couple of pieces vs. a whole army and you checkmating them.
My lowest centipawn loss would probably be this game:
http://en.lichess.org/FIWKmjWK/white#0
I find it quite easy to have a low centipawn loss in the english opening just because you can play 20 thematic moves that are all decent. One of my funniest games is this: http://en.lichess.org/FRbiPr41/white#0
I feel however that a low centipawn loss is just as or more important than innaccuracies because whilst mistakes and blunders can easily cost a game, an innaccuracy generally just prolongs it and most of the time the innaccuracy is because of insane depth computer calculation. E.g. http://en.lichess.org/Vj3rrCYk/black#0
But nothing beats a good swashbuckling blunder galore mess of a crazy attack that ends in a couple of pieces vs. a whole army and you checkmating them.
