|
|
RedSoxFan3
Admirable
Legendary Hero
Fan of Red Sox
|
posted January 19, 2005 01:48 AM |
|
|
I think that it's clear that white made a major mistake with b3 and black took advantage of it with a knight chain to d4. The knight is far too powerful. b3 gives up any possible control over d4.
c3 is a necessary move that is now impossible by playing b3. The flexibility was clearly needed later in the game.
c3 if black doesn't take, then cxb4... cxb4 taking the pawn off the key d4 square. I think that white needs to take a look at ways to neutralize control over the d4 square taking away good attacks for black.
I will take a look at the position some more later.
I think the knight chain to d4 was the right idea. White simply cannot control d4. And having a knight there is very strong.
I may be wrong, but I think at some point in the game c3 would have been a useful move.
Personally I've never thought the closed sicilian is particularly strong for white. The dark square bishop is a monster for black.
Open Sicilian Lines just seem much stronger to me.
____________
Go Red Sox!
|
|
Lews_Therin
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted January 19, 2005 02:39 AM |
|
|
Uhm, I think I mentioned somewhere that Kasparov attached an exclamation mark to 14.b3.
Yes, gaining control of the whole dark square complex is the point of black´s play. And of course b2-b3 significantly weakens square d4.
But playing c2-c3 instead weakens the position even more. Black will either take on c3, or just keep the tension (cxb4 is out of the question because of Nxb4. The pawns c3 and d3 are both targets, and black is able to put pressure on them quickly ... for example sooner or later a bishop will appear on a6. White can try to defend this to a draw, but there is no chance for him to ever get a kingside attack going.
C2-c3 is often played when the a-file is left closed, to gain time while throwing back a black knight d4.
____________
|
|
RedSoxFan3
Admirable
Legendary Hero
Fan of Red Sox
|
|
posted January 19, 2005 07:26 AM |
|
|
Maybe I need to get a book on positional theory. I know plenty of tactics already such as mating patterns, discovered attacks, pinning, sacrifices etc...
But positional theory is different and I think I need to have a better understanding of position. Could you recommend any books?
____________
Go Red Sox!
|
|
Lews_Therin
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted January 19, 2005 01:39 PM |
|
|
Well, first of all, don´t take my response too negatively. You were very right to recognize that white had a huge dark-square problem in the game, and that moves like b2-b3 should not be made lightly ... after which it is not possible anymore to control any dark square with a pawn. So the suggestion to avoid this and play c2-c3 instead is actually a very good idea ... that can be improved on by not really playing c2-c3, but rather let the pawn stand on b2 as long as possible, and by that keep some control of the dark squares. That´s how Reshevsky gained some advantage in the game against Korchnoi, that I refered to after move 13.
Spassky´s idea to play b2-b3 immediately is somewhat counter-intuitive, but based on the insight that if black plays correctly, he will be forced to make this move anyway, and by doing it immediately, the rook saves a tempo, going to c1 immediately, and not to b1 first. Positionally white´s queenside doesn´t look happy, but at least it is solid, the pawn base on c2 is covered very well for the moment, so that white has his hands free to prepare a kingside attack.
A good book on positional ideas? "Judgement and Planning in Chess" by Max Euwe is great at explaining basic positional ideas. I already recommended it to Wub, and if I remember well, he found it quite useful, too.
____________
|
|
RedSoxFan3
Admirable
Legendary Hero
Fan of Red Sox
|
|
posted January 19, 2005 11:34 PM |
|
|
The book I have on openings has most certainly helped me quite a bit already. I have added the French to my black lines, because I haven't been having good success with the various open sicilian lines.
I was looking at the position again and I found that playing 7. a4 leads into a neutral position over the d4 square.
7. a4 a6 8. Nce2 b5 9. axb5 axb5 9. c3 b4 +-
I think this position looks much nicer for white. With black's counterplay neutralized, black will have a very difficult time holding off a very difficult kingside attack.
____________
Go Red Sox!
|
|
Lews_Therin
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted January 20, 2005 03:37 AM |
|
|
Uhm, no. It´s just a transposition into what I mentioned earlier. White has no advantage in development, but weak pawns on c3 and d3 already, so I wonder how he wants to get any kingside initiative going at all.
And if he tries to take the centre with 11.d4 bxc3 12.bxc3 cxd4 13.cxd4, there is 13...d5 - again the best that white can hope for is a draw.
____________
|
|
RedSoxFan3
Admirable
Legendary Hero
Fan of Red Sox
|
|
posted January 20, 2005 04:13 AM |
|
|
d4? no white should play e5. e5 gains tempo because of the hanging knight.
But if none of this works, then it's clear to me that black is stronger in the Closed Sicilian, which makes sense because it's a closed game and black has strong positional advantage.
My recommendation is that white shouldn't give black such strong positional counterplay in closed game chess. So in other words I would simply choose not to play the Closed Sicilian. Though I'm not aware of your success with it in the past. I just think there are stronger openings to play in the sicilian.
____________
Go Red Sox!
|
|
Lews_Therin
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted January 20, 2005 11:26 AM |
|
|
Quote:
d4? no white should play e5. e5 gains tempo because of the hanging knight.
Yes, but white´s lacking in development, so I don´t see why he would want to further open the position. 11.e5 Qc7 12.d4 bxc4 14.bxc3 cxd4 15.cxd4 Nb4, and guess who´s better here?
Quote:
But if none of this works, then it's clear to me that black is stronger in the Closed Sicilian, which makes sense because it's a closed game and black has strong positional advantage.
That may be clear to you, but I´m doubtful that you know and understand more than 0,1% of the bigger picture, and on grandmaster level, they apparently came to different conclusions. The Closed Sicilian is not regarded as the most dangerous for black in opening theory, but it´s still employed succesfully from time to time by world-class players such as Morozevich and Short. And it was the favourite weapon of former world champion Boris Spassky. But today it´s most popular to play this setup on the black side after 1.c4 e5, because the one tempo doesn´t make a large difference in the ensuing slow positions.
In my game, white didn´t choose the best plan on the 18th move, and then missed his chances to keep it equal later, so naturally I had a large advantage at some point that I could make use of.
Quote:
Though I'm not aware of your success with it in the past.
My success with it is and has been only on the black side. I never play 1.e4 myself.
____________
|
|
RedSoxFan3
Admirable
Legendary Hero
Fan of Red Sox
|
|
posted January 20, 2005 01:06 PM |
|
|
For some reason I thought you were white...
Meh. Good work 
____________
Go Red Sox!
|
|
Lews_Therin
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted January 20, 2005 01:16 PM |
|
|
Hehe, thanks  .
____________
|
|
RedSoxFan3
Admirable
Legendary Hero
Fan of Red Sox
|
|
posted January 20, 2005 01:21 PM |
|
|
Maybe I'll take another look at it from black's perspective.
____________
Go Red Sox!
|
|
Lews_Therin
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted January 21, 2005 05:09 PM |
|
|
I´m not even sure that it´s a matter of perspective. In chess positions with sharp opposite side attacks, it´s always necessary to make certain concessions where you are weak, and in return force concessions where you are strong. And white´s the weak dark-square complex in my game is such a concession. It´s not nice, but at least the pawns are all well-defended for a long time.
Maybe I should post one of my King´s Indian games sometime. The setting is similar there, but much more extreme ... the losing side usually looks like it´s being completely torn apart. Does that make the King´s Indian a bad opening for black or white? No, but it´s surely one where small mistakes invite big punishment.
____________
|
|
Wub
Responsible
Famous Hero
|
|
posted March 16, 2005 02:48 AM |
|
Edited By: Wub on 15 Mar 2005
|
Hello Lews!
Just at the moment you were wondering if I would ever post here again  , I found the time today to finish my analysis. I really do envy those boring nightshifts sometimes . I’ll start out with your quite instructive comments on my earlier post.
Quote:
Against Teske I totally misplayed the opening. 7...Qd8? was a mistake, after which black already has a very bad position. Instead it was practically forced to go into the complications after 7...Qe4+ 8.Be3 Bg4
As I play this with black as well (I play 1. …c5 against everything and usually financhetto my dark bishop against everything too ), it is quite interesting to look at this line some further. It seems like theory prefers 8. …Nh6 instead of 8. …Bg4 to stop the threat of 9. Bxf7+. Against 8. …Bg4, 9. Nb5 seems quite strong because the king can’t castle away.
Quote:
Teske was unhappy about 10.Nxd4 afterwards, and prefered 10.0-0-0 instead. Maybe 10.0-0-0 [0-0] 11.Rxd4 Qa5 12.Qb5 ... but I don´t remember exactly what his idea was anymore.
In that case, as far as I can see after 12. …Nc6 13. Qxa5 Nxa5, black isn’t doing that bad either, though his light bishop is a problem for now.
Thank you for your comments on my analysis of that Dutch game as well. Seems you have some good points.
Quote:
I find 11...g5 more logical than 11...Nc5 - white leaves c1-h6, and black immediately claims space there. Who has suggested that it´s not satisfactorily for black? Were there any variations given?
I probably paid too much attention to the comment I have read, thinking it was made by quite a strong player, but it is likely that my expectations were too high. No variations given, only the claims that he studied the Leningrad deeply and that 11. …Nc5 was tried as an improvement. Some scepticism could be appropriate here ?
Quote:
Well, the main reason why I played 12.e3 was to reply f2-f4 anytime black plays g6-g5. But as long as there is no f5-f4 threat, I rather keep my position solid and unweakened.
I agree that this pawn configuration has insignificant weaknesses in comparison with a structure with pawns on e2, f4, g3 and h3 where the e4 and e3 squares are terribly weakened. I’m wondering about a more general question though, not specific to this game. I usually try to avoid playing both e3 and g3 (or g6 and e6) in positions with a kingside fianchetto, assuming that especially the f3 (f6) square becomes too weak (and it may also impede my other bishop). Above you say that e3 (e6) leaves the position unweakened. Did you only mean that in regard to this game (in which case I don’t see black profiting from it either) or can your remark also be seen more generally?
Quote:
In my opinion the mistake is not 12...c6, but the later 14...c5 may already be inaccurate, resolving the tension too early. In any case this move should only be played if it can be followed by an immediate b7-b5.
I think you are right. You wrote that hurrying a4 maybe wasn’t necessary, but it seems to counter the idea of c5 not followed by an immediate b5 pretty well.
Quote:
I don´t like 16.Ne6 at all. It seems to lose almost all of the hold that I have on black´s position, exchanging the d5 pawn for black´s b7.
I think I underestimated the importance of pawn d5 here in maintaining the initiative and the grip on black’s position. That’s something to remember for other positions as well (the modern benoni for example).
Quote:
But it seems to me that black has sufficient counterplay after 32.Nxb6 Rxb6 33.Qxa5 Rb8 34.Qa7 Re8 35.b6 Nxf4
Unfortunately, yes, in that line black seems to have a perpetual check. Hence, you spotted that well during your time trouble .
Quote:
Hope you´ll find some time to play chess despite of your studies, and this time kick the IM´s butt, who you have reached a winning position against
Well this chess season is still going ok, as I am still on course to prolong my club championship and cup title and get an elo performance in the team championship competition of over 2000. But more importantly, I keep experiencing more and more excitement from my chess games and I still feel quite motivated to improve. What about you? Have you participated in any tournaments lately? And is your team still on schedule to survive the 2. Bundesliga?
I’ve also looked at your modern benoni team game. I’m still having lots of fun with that opening, so this should be a nice exercise. Haven’t been able to play it very often in an OTB game unfortunately, let alone encountered the flick knife attack, but I hope that will change soon.
1. d4 Nf6
Apparently you were sure again that your opponent was going for that ‘classical opening treatment’. At least for me it is no worry how my game is going to end up in a database .
2. c4 c5 3. d5 e6 4. Nc3 exd5 5. cxd5 d6 6. e4 g6 7. f4 Bg7 8. Bb5+ Nfd7 9. a4 a6
It occurred to me that I still have no idea why you prefer this sideline. If I’m not mistaken, 9. …0-0 is the mainline here, while 9. …a6 and 9. …Qh4+ are equally popular and 9. …Na6 has been played occasionally. You explained how you base your choice of where to retreat your queen after 10. …Qh4+ on where the white bishop retreats after 9. …a6. I guess that this is the main advantage of 9… a6 over 9. …Qh4+? But do you think that 9. …a6 is also superior to the mainline, or is this just a matter of preferring slightly offbeat but sound lines (as is the case for me)?
10. Bd3 Qh4+ 11. g3 Qd8 12. Nf3 O-O 13. O-O Nf6 14. f5 Nbd7
One of my alternative ideas here that seems to survive the computer analysis is 14. …Ng4. While Nbd7 develops a piece, Ng4 immediately threatens Ne5. I can’t estimate which move is better, though. The move 14. …c4 which aims at winning back a pawn on f5 is premature, unfortunately, as (among other things) the king’s position looks suspect and white gets rid of his backward e4 pawn.
15. Bg5
I too considered Kg2 here, but if that move was to be played it seems somewhat inconsistent with the idea behind 14. f5. I also looked at 15. Bf4 to bind a black piece to the important d6 pawn. However, black seems to get good play with 15. …Ng4!, as 16. fxg6 hxg6 17. Bxd6 fails to 17. …Re8 and now for example 18. Bf4 c4 19. Bxc4 Qb6+ 20. Kh1 Qxb2 or 18. Qb3 b5! 19. axb5 Qb6.
15. …c4
It seems that GM Helgi Olafsson, who if I remember well is the best chess player from Iceland, approves of John Watson’s innovative line that you cite, since he used it himself. Which is important because I don’t know to what extent Watson’s home-analysis has become established theory. So even though carefulness is in place here, it seems that 15. …Qc7 is indeed the superior move.
16. Bxc4 Qb6+ 17. Qd4 Qxd4+
During my over the board analysis I quickly rejected 17. …Qxb2 because of 18. Rfb1 Qc2 19. Ra2. But I assume that after 18. …Nxe4 19. Qxg7+ Kxg7 20. Rxb2 Nxc3 21. Be7 Re8 22. Bxd6 white’s bishop pair and piece activity are too much for black as well?
18. Nxd4 Nxe4
18. …Nxd5 19. Bxd5 Bxd4+ 20. Kg2 looks better for white too, due to the threat of Be7.
18. …Nb6 19. Bb3 Nxe4 20. Nxe4 Bxd4+ 21. Kg2 transposes to the line you gave.
19. Nxe4 Bxd4+ 20. Kg2 Nb6
20. …Bxb2 21. Rae1 Nb6 22. Bb3 again transposes to that very line.
20. …f6 leads to extensive complications, but they seem to be favourable for white, for example: 21. Bh6 Rd8 22. fxg6 hxg6 23. Rae1 Bxb2 24. Bf4.
21. Nxd6
I can’t find any improvements for black in the 21. Bxb3 line either. The move 21. …Bxf5 for example also doesn’t work out at all: 22. Nxd6 (threatening Be7) Bxb2 23. Nxf5 gxf5 24. Re1 Be5 25. Rxf5 f6 26. Be3 or 22. …Bd3 23. Re1 Bxb2 24. Rad1.
21... Nxc4 22. Nxc4 Bxf5 23. Rad1 Bc5 24. Be3
I feel there should be a better winning attempt here than just trying to deprive black of his bishop pair. I was somewhat surprised that the obvious try of d6 does not work out due to f6, but could not find an improvement for white. So what about 24. Bf6 to stop f6 and keep e8 under control? Now 24. …Bc2 is met by 25. d6! If 25. …Bxd1?!, then 26. Rxd1 b5 27. Ne5 bxa4 28. d7 Bb6 29. Nc6 Bd8 30. Nxd8 Rfd8 and white may try to win this (I guess 31.g4). Better is 25. …Bxa4 and then 26. d7 Bxd1 27. Rxd1 b5 28. Rd5 Ba7 29. Ne5 Bb6 30. Nc6 Bd8 31. Nxd8 Rfxd8 32. b4. That’s the best bet that I can find for white to win the game here.
24... Rac8 25. Bxc5 Be4+ 26. Kg1 Rxc5
I feel that ultimately trading off the bishops actually decreases white’s winning chances. I think the game should be within drawing boundaries here, as an advance of the passed pawn can be met by playing a rook to d8 and the bishop to c6. Trading minor pieces seems to lead to a drawn endgame as well. On the other hand, I’d better not say those things too quickly when your opponent and GM Nijboer need 20 minutes to analyse that ending .
27. Nd6 f5 28. Nxb7 Rxd5 29. Rxd5 Bxd5 30. Nc5 Rb8 31. Nd7 Rd8 32. Nf6+ Kf7 33. Nxd5 Rxd5 34. b4 Ke6 35. Rb1 Kd6 36. b5 axb5 37. axb5 Kc7
There really isn’t much to comment on both you and your opponents endplay. Perfect technique there. Not surprisingly, 37. …Kc5 also draws: 38. b6 Rd8 39. b7 Rb8 40. Kg2 Kc6 41. Kf3 Rxb7 42. Rxb7 Kxb7 43. Kf4 Kc6=.
38. Re1 Rxb5 39. Re7+ Kd6 40. Rxh7 Ke6 1/2-1/2
I think this must have been a very tense game, but you have defended the draw quite skilfully. It’s a pity for another benoni fan like me to see that the Taimanov attack can give white such dominating play even if black makes one slight inaccuracy (15. c4?!). Intuitively I think that there could be a more promising continuation for white to play for a win (maybe 24. Bf6?). After the dark bishop trade, the game seemed like a sure draw to me. Again an interesting game, but now it’s time to allow myself to study your closed Sicilian. Great .
____________
|
|
csarmi
Supreme Hero
gets back
|
|
posted March 25, 2005 03:55 PM |
|
Edited By: csarmi on 21 Aug 2005
|
Just a little thing.
Could you include the pgn files while analyzing a game. Would be much easier to follow with my Schredder.
(all that's needed is the moves in one go, not separated by words and other moves)
I have an endgame I was thinking about (Sax - Korcsnoj btw from Wijk an Zee, 1991 - to decide who plays against Karpov, 10th game)
it starts from this position:
Kg1, Qg4, pawns: a2, d4, h4
Kf8, Rh7, Ng6, pawns: a7, b7, d5, e6
(Qxe6 - Nxh4, Qc8+ - Kf7, Qxb7+ - Kg6, Qxd5 - Nf5)
If Black manages to play a7-a6 and his rook on the 6th line, I guess it should be a draw.
I tried something like Qc6+ - Kg5, Qa4 - Kf4, Kf2 - Ke4, Qc2+ - Kf4, Qc1+ - Kg4, Qa3 - Rh2+, Kf1 - Rh7, Kg2 - Kg5 and cant seem to get a progress (Fritz 8 is defending without tablebases so thats no a help)
|
|
russ
Promising
Supreme Hero
blah, blah, blah
|
|
posted November 24, 2006 09:28 PM |
|
|
bump, I love chess 
|
|
csarmi
Supreme Hero
gets back
|
|
posted June 17, 2007 12:22 PM |
|
|
|
russ
Promising
Supreme Hero
blah, blah, blah
|
|
posted November 02, 2007 03:12 PM |
|
|
|
Homer171
Promising
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted November 03, 2007 02:16 AM |
|
|
Hey Spectrum you where supposed to run that Chess tournament is it still on. Never had the change to play against Ted and show him my Sicilian defense and Brazilian attack
____________
Don't be too proud of this technological terror you've constructed. The ability to destroy a planet is insignificant next to the power of the Force.
|
|
Ted
Promising
Supreme Hero
Peanut Exterminator
|
|
posted November 03, 2007 10:17 AM |
|
|
hmm, if you want to play me so bad, just IM a time and i will try to make it
____________
Visit my Site!
|
|
Spectrum
Famous Hero
Plan B
|
|
posted November 04, 2007 07:21 PM |
|
|
Yeah I was but the summer holidays came and sort of ruined the whole thing. We could try reviving it, though.
____________
Aculias is like the male nipple of HC, TNT being the other one -Baklava
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
