Heroes of Might and Magic Community
visiting hero! Register | Today's Posts | Games | Search! | FAQ/Rules | AvatarList | MemberList | Profile


Age of Heroes Headlines:  
5 Oct 2016: Heroes VII development comes to an end.. - read more
6 Aug 2016: Troubled Heroes VII Expansion Release - read more
26 Apr 2016: Heroes VII XPack - Trial by Fire - Coming out in June! - read more
17 Apr 2016: Global Alternative Creatures MOD for H7 after 1.8 Patch! - read more
7 Mar 2016: Romero launches a Piano Sonata Album Kickstarter! - read more
19 Feb 2016: Heroes 5.5 RC6, Heroes VII patch 1.7 are out! - read more
13 Jan 2016: Horn of the Abyss 1.4 Available for Download! - read more
17 Dec 2015: Heroes 5.5 update, 1.6 out for H7 - read more
23 Nov 2015: H7 1.4 & 1.5 patches Released - read more
31 Oct 2015: First H7 patches are out, End of DoC development - read more
5 Oct 2016: Heroes VII development comes to an end.. - read more
[X] Remove Ads
LOGIN:     Username:     Password:         [ Register ]
HOMM1: info forum | HOMM2: info forum | HOMM3: info mods forum | HOMM4: info CTG forum | HOMM5: info mods forum | MMH6: wiki forum | MMH7: wiki forum
Heroes Community > Other Games Exist Too > Thread: HC Chess club
Thread: HC Chess club This thread is 11 pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 · «PREV / NEXT»
bjorn190
bjorn190


Responsible
Supreme Hero
Jebus maker
posted June 28, 2004 04:35 AM

It would be cool if someone changed the rules in chess.. then all this thought would be for nothing

It's a fun game but its not worth thinking too much about. A good chess computer on highest diff can beat most players, so its more efficient to let the computer play, to allow us humans to do more complex things.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Lews_Therin
Lews_Therin


Promising
Famous Hero
posted June 28, 2004 05:37 AM
Edited By: Lews_Therin on 27 Jun 2004

@ Svarog: LOL

Bjoern, even if the rules of chess were changed, it would be far from being (having been) for nothing. Playing a good chess game - I believe - feels like making a work of art or music or literature, and moving through it afterwards compares to the respective looking, listening and reading. For myself I´d find it hard to name a constant source of similar joy ... unless there´s a woman involved . And there´s one particular game that I posted in this thread - I´m not sure that I would be willing to exchange it even for a night with Lucy Liu .

As for comparing us to chess computers ... well, do human sprinters compete against formula 1 cars ?
Anyway, even though those machines are able to calculate millions of positions per second, the strongest grandmasters in the world play much higher quality chess than the best chess programs. Their matches are fairly even only for the simple reason that humans tire and blunder after hours of concentration.
____________

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Wub
Wub


Responsible
Famous Hero
posted July 01, 2004 02:30 PM

Hello Lews,

I’m sure those few hours with Viktor the Terrible gave more satisfaction than any woman could offer in a whole day. Ack, this sounds very wrong .

Thank you again for your good explanations . I already suspected my reasoning concerning 6. …d5? was fishy. And don’t worry about those mistakes you made in that game against Meijers. To me, if there is one type of positions that requires higher chess logics in order to be grasped, it is those Maroczy-bind positions. It is remarkable how level of play separates players who prefer 5. c4 from those who prefer 5. Nf3. I have played quite a few accelerated dragon games at my club for example, but never even encountered 5. c4. In fact, when it is played against me in Internet blitz games, there is a very good chance I am actually playing a prog. So in other words: I consider the Maroczy bind to be an elite opening and any games that help me understand it are most welcome. On top of that, I could not really spot many mistakes in your last game either, but you called that one not such a good game either .


“Hello Svarog”

You are cracking me up .


Hello Bjorn,

I would agree with Lews that playing chess is valuable in itself. It keeps you mentally very fit and sharp, significantly improves analytical thinking and I find it a lot more fun than similar games. Checkers, for example, is less diverse in my opinion, while the tactical and strategical elements of other similar games are often dependent on luck and diplomacy. Also, chess comes close to art for me as well. And looking through old chess games that I played doesn’t feel much different from looking through a photo album.

You’re right that when the starting position in chess would be changed, my efforts of learning opening theory would be more in vain, though I even find studying opening theory quite interesting.
____________

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
bjorn190
bjorn190


Responsible
Supreme Hero
Jebus maker
posted July 01, 2004 04:32 PM

My confession:

I love chess. I play it every day on the internet.

I wish I knew more about it, but Im intuitive and chaotic and I absolutely *hate* learning things by heart.. I prefer making it up as I go along.

And chess with its stability makes it efficient to learn opening strategy as a foundation for further play. I wish that I knew all those openings, but I doubt that I have the discipline to fight my unwillingness to learn them.

There are so many things to discover still. Why waste even a millisecond learning chess openings :/  Still.. I wish I had that time. Then I would learn them, and play better. It just seems I always find other things that I would rather do..  sux

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Svarog
Svarog


Honorable
Supreme Hero
statue-loving necrophiliac
posted July 02, 2004 12:02 AM
Edited By: Svarog on 1 Jul 2004

Quote:
And there´s one particular game that I posted in this thread - I´m not sure that I would be willing to exchange it even for a night with Lucy Liu


There you go, kids. Another perfect example why you shouldn't even touch that chess stuff ever again in your life.

Hey, bjorn. I second your thoughts 100%. But face it buddy, we just dont like chess enough like these two fellas. Ah screw it, at least we prefer Lucy Liu, and I'm perfectly happy with that.
____________
The meek shall inherit the earth, but NOT its mineral rights.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | PP | Quote Reply | Link
Lews_Therin
Lews_Therin


Promising
Famous Hero
posted July 03, 2004 11:40 AM
Edited By: Lews_Therin on 7 Jul 2004

Hello Wub,

I managed to concentrate for two hours and annotate the game here at work. Hopefully my analyses are any good - I´m becoming too tired and too sleepy right now to double-check all of those variations.

Regarding the tournament, I was quite happy about the chess I played, but rather unlucky with the pairings of most rounds. For Elo and for prize money, I usually got the worst drawing that was possible.
After winning the first three games on the first two days, the third day I had the pleasure to play two International Masters. Against the first one, Yuri Boidman, I was able to keep the balance and draw around move 40. In the afternoon I played and lost the game that is shown below, against Viesturs Meijers, who had an Elo rating around 2500.
Round 6 was the short Nimzo-Indian that I´ve quoted earlier, after which I had 4,5 points and good chances to reach place 2 or 3 and win a nice amount of money with a win. Unfortunately, my opponent there was the most extreme super-solid player of the tournament and had also white - even though I was able to reach an advantageous endgame, he managed to defend the draw, his fifth consecutive one by the way. 4th place of 52 is not a bad result at all, in a field with four international masters, but it´s not what you want when there are three money prices.

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 g6 5.c4 Bg7 6.Be3 Nf6 7.Nc3 0-0 8.Nc2
This is a sideline, but quite a logical, and also a dangerous one: As white has a space advantage and the intention to cramp black, he prevents an exchange of minor pieces on d4.
By the way, white is also playing the English 1.c4 c5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nc3 d5 4.cxd5 Nxd5 5.g3 e5 6.Bg2 Nc7 line with an extra tempo. This is more unpleasant for black as it sounds like ...
I knew that Viesturs Meijers plays the Nd4-c2 system, but I was slightly surprised about his timing. During the game, I considered the move-order 8.Nc2 to be slightly inferior, because it gives me two extra possibilities - the one in the line below, and the move I played in the game. I had expected 8.Be2 d6 9.0-0 Bd7 and only now 10.Nc2. While this is certainly the more accurate choice to avoid the 9. ...Bd7, 10. ...Nxd4 and 11. ...a5 system, it permits black to play the critical Gurgenidze variation: 9. ...Nxd4 10.Bxd4 Be6.
8...d6 9.Be2 Be6
9...Nd7 10.0-0 Nc5 11.f3 f5 is the most principled response here, to immediately make use of the knights´ absence on d4. Personally I don´t like the positions with weak central pawns on the semi-open d- and e-files, although there´s probably enough dynamic compensation for black.
Before the game it had been my intention to play 9...Bd7 , expecting the abovementioned move-order. When I was given the choice, I found the game move preferable, as e6 is the more active square, as it keeps my bishop out of the way of potential c4-c5 tactics, and as it also prevents white´s extra possibility to cover the c4-pawn with Nc2-a3.
On the other hand, without the bishop´s supporting b7-b5 from d7, breaking the bind on the kingside becomes solely a tactical matter. Which means: If there´s no tactical breakthrough, there´s no breakthrough at all.
10.0-0 Rc8
The logical continuation. As white´s knights are piling up on the c-file, I want to play a7-a6 and Nc6-e/a5, and answer b2-b3 with b7-b5 if possible.
11.Qd2 a6 12.f3
In a game Kasimdzhanov-Vogt, white played 12.b3 Qa5 13.Rad1 b5 14.cxb5 axb5 15.Nxb5 Qxd2 16.Bxd2 Nxe4 , and while I tend to like black here, the strong Usbek grandmaster succesfully pushed his connected passers and won convincingly.
12...Re8!?
To my disappointment, a tactical b7-b5 push didn´t seem to be possible, and I decided to make this prophylactic and semi-waiting move. In many lines it´s important to have e7 covered, as sooner or later a knight will appear on d5. No matter if I exchange on d5 or not, pawn e7 will be the main target in my camp.
Regarding the concrete position, I wanted to be able (if necessary) to play Qd8-a5 and provoke b2-b4, without leaving e7 unprotected.
On the bad side, Rf8-e8 takes the breakthrough possibilty f7-f5 out of my position.
12...Nd7 13.b3 f5 14.exf5 Bxf5 15.Nd4 Nxd4 16.Bxd4 Bxd4+ 17.Qxd4 might have been a reasonable alternative.
12...Na5 13.b3 Qc7 would have been the most consequent choice, but 14.Rac1 b5 15.Nd5 is clearly better for white of course.
13.Rab1 Ne5 14.b3 Qa5 15.a4
And b7-b5 is prevented. How do I make any progress now?
15...Nfd7!
Considering that white is also rapidly gaining space on the queenside, it´s important to get some relief by exchanging material. Now white cannot avoid this, as Ne5xf3+ is threatened, and 16.b4? Qd8(c7) would lose the c4-pawn.
16.Nd4 Nc6
And a knight goes off the board. To my surprise, white made the unusual decision to be the one who executes the exchange ...
17.Nxc6 Rxc6?!
... and an irritated me made the mistake to take back with the rook. Of course 17...bxc6 is the natural move, gaining more central influence and covering the all-important d5 square. But I was afraid of my strong opponent´s intentions - maybe push the pawn to b5, force a double exchange, and thus win back d5 AND gain a powerful b-passer? Or favourably play b2-b4 and c4-c5, take on a6, and aquire a free a-pawn while my structure is disrupted?
Looking at the position with a clear mind, it´s obvious that such a szenario is hardly realistic. Black´s pieces are well-placed to counter those plans. For example 18.b4 Qc7 19.Rfc1 Nb6! 20.c5 dxc5 21.Bxc5 Bxc3 22.Qxc3 Nxa4 23.Qc2 Nxc5 24.Qxc5 Qb7 25.Ra1 Rb8=
18.b4 Qd8 19.Nd5 b6
This is what I had relied on. The threat a4-a5 is prevented, and now black is going to push his own pawn there and gain control of the dark squares. Unfortunately, white´s pieces are far better developed to exploit the opening of the queenside.
20.Rfc1 a5?
I could still have obtained a solid position by switching to waiting tactics: 20...Rc8! , and it´s not at all clear how white is going to make use of his space advantage.
21.Rb3 axb4
It´s not so easy anymore to "do nothing", as white is now able to mount pressure and release it by means of b4xa5 b6xa5 Rb3-b5 at any time.
22.Rxb4 Bxd5 23.cxd5 Rxc1+ 24.Qxc1 Qa8 25.Bb5?!
25.Qc6! Nc5 26.Bd1! wins a pawn.
25...Rc8 26.Bc6 Qa5 27.Qb1 Nc5 28.g3
For the moment, black´s position looks defensible: 28.Rxb6 Nxa4 29.Rb8 Rf8 30.Rb5 Nc3 31.Rxa5 Nxb1 and black should be able to hold the draw. So white decides to improve his king safety and slowly prepare a breakthrough.
28...h5 29.Kg2 Rb8 30.Bd2 Qa6 31.Bb5 Qa7 32.Be1 Ra8?
I would have liked to swap places of queen and rook, after which it´s hard to imagine white winning b6 without losing a4. White doesn´t have to permit this, of course.
During the game I considered to further solidify my kingside by playing the correct Bg7-f6, possibly followed by Kg8-g7. But time was ticking away, I became afraid of ghosts in the form of a well-timed f2-f4&e4-e5 advance (which is a completely absurd idea of course), and I didn´t see the e7 pawn becoming a problem anywhere in the future ...
33.Bc6 Rc8?!
After this, the game is lost. I had to sacrifice my Queen: 33...Rb8 34.a5 Qxa5 35.Ra4 Qxa4 36.Bxa4 Nxa4 37.Qb5, but I don´t like my chances to hold the position after the continuation 37...Nc5 38.Bf2 g5 39.Bxc5 dxc5 40.f4 gxf4 41.gxf4±/+-
34.Rxb6 Nxa4 35.Rb7
That´s it. Now 35. ...Qa6 loses to 36.Qa2 Nc5 37.Qxa6 Nxa6 38.Rxe7. Here I deeply regretted that I did not improve my kingside when I had time for it.
35...Qe3 36.Bf2 Qd2 37.Bxa4
Sad luck - by taking my knight on a4, the bishop also covers the important c2 square. In time-trouble I made a few more moves ...
37...Rc1 38.Qb4 Bc3 39.Qb6 Qa2 40.Qd8+ Kh7 41.Qxe7 Bd4 42.Qxf7+ Kh6 43.Qf8+ 1-0
____________

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Wub
Wub


Responsible
Famous Hero
posted July 15, 2004 03:05 AM
Edited By: Wub on 14 Jul 2004

Hello Lews,

Regarding your 4th place in that tournament I’d put it as follows:

1 ticket to Baden Wörishofen: € 40.
1 opening book on the Englund gambit (just in case) €15
Missing a prize by just an inch: € 250
Obtaining your first IM norm, drawing against Korchnoi and playing the tournament of your life: priceless .

It was great to study a Maroczy-bind game in this way so I seized the opportunity to analyze the merits of each opening move very carefully. I hope I understood the game reasonably well.

I see you played 2. Nc6 in this game, but in the database I noticed you occasionally prefer the hyper-accelerated move order. Is this to avoid the Rossolimo attack? But what is the drawback then; are Alapin Sicilians harder to tackle?

Quote:  
While this is certainly the more accurate choice to avoid the 9. ...Bd7, 10. ...Nxd4 and 11. ...a5 system, it permits black to play the critical Gurgenidze variation: 9. ...Nxd4 10.Bxd4 Be6.

Is this variation really considered to be the critical test of the Maroczy bind? I wouldn’t have thought that. To my knowledge, the Gurgenidze variation even was something like 5. c4 Nf6 6. Nc3 Nxd4 7. Qxd4 d6. This can’t transpose in the above position, can it?

Your 8. …d6 seems to be the natural move, as 8. …b6 aims for the one breakthrough that is not facilitated by white’s 8. Nc2. Meijers’ 9. Be2 also looks like the logical answer as it develops a piece, though I think 9. f3 is okay too and will probably transpose into the 9. Be2 line. I assume the move 9. Qd2 is inaccurate because of 9. …Ng4.

Quote:
Be6
I found the game move preferable […] as it also prevents white´s extra possibility to cover the c4-pawn with Nc2-a3

It does? I did see that an ill-prepared Nc2-a3 runs into a Nxe4 Nxe4 Bxb2 tactic, but it is unclear to me what that has to do with the placement of the bishop on e6/d7.

Quote:
9. …Be6
9...Nd7 10.0-0 Nc5 11.f3 f5 is the most principled response here, to immediately make use of the knights´ absence on d4. Personally I don´t like the positions with weak central pawns on the semi-open d- and e-files, although there´s probably enough dynamic compensation for black.

One can wonder if in this position black can really afford the luxury to play in accordance with his personal preferences. Either way, I myself would definitely opt for this line, though this may be my simplistic 1800- ELO-mentality of if I can’t break through, I’m in trouble . But on the other hand, I have played through many games with the position after 9. …Be6 in the database and a lot of them still feature the Nd7 manoeuvre. Also, the immediate 9. …Nd7 scores very well (though I am not insinuating that 9. …Be6 is a bad move).

Quote:
Rc8
The logical continuation. As white´s knights are piling up on the c-file, I want to play a7-a6 and Nc6-e/a5, and answer b2-b3 with b7-b5 if possible.


While I agree that the plan behind 10. …Rc8 seems logical, it looks like black cannot extort a b7-b5 breakthrough this way (as the game shows) nor get any other form of active counterplay. As a result, while in itself 12. …Re8!? may be a good move, strategically speaking it seems to me that it still is a concession. Also, I don’t think you play the accelerated dragon to reach this kind of positions.

I looked for other moves than 10. …Rc8 (other than 10. …Nd7), but the alternatives represent a similar plan. Still, I have the feeling that 10. …Ne5 might be a bit more accurate. Not only is it more compulsory, white must be very careful:

10. …Ne5 11. b3 Qa5 12. Qd2 Nc6 and if white plays a ‘natural’ move such as 13. f3, black can even get an edge with 13. …Ng4. The move 13. b4 looks critical and leads to a largely forced variation though black is still well alive after: 13. …Nxb4 14. Nxb4 Qxb4 15. Rb1 Qa5 16. Rxb7 Nd7 17. Nd5 Qxd2 18. Nxe7+ Kh8 19. Bxd2 Nc5 20. Rc7 Nxe4. I must admit that I like white a bit more here, but as nothing is decided yet, it may be an alternative.

Quote:
In a game Kasimdzhanov-Vogt, white played 12.b3 Qa5 13.Rad1 b5 14.cxb5 axb5 15.Nxb5 Qxd2 16.Bxd2 Nxe4 , and while I tend to like black here, the strong Usbek grandmaster succesfully pushed his connected passers and won convincingly.

And then to think that until a few weeks ago I never heard of Kasimdzhanov . What I find remarkable in this game is that even though black performed very well strategically until this point, it appeared not enough to hold the draw. That makes one think about black’s chances as a whole in this line.

Quote:
12...Nd7 13.b3 f5 14.exf5 Bxf5 15.Nd4 Nxd4 16.Bxd4 Bxd4+ 17.Qxd4 might have been a reasonable alternative.

I have studied the resulting position especially on black’s strategic goals since I think that playing the Maroczy demands a certain familiarity with exactly this sort of situations. If I understood it well, ideally black wants to play e7-e5 and get a knight on d4 to block the weakness on d6. But as I see it, white can prevent this from happening in all variations, so I think white is still better here.

Quote:
15...Nfd7!
Considering that white is also rapidly gaining space on the queenside, it´s important to get some relief by exchanging material. Now white cannot avoid this, as Ne5xf3+ is threatened, and 16.b4? Qd8(c7) would lose the c4-pawn.


The right choice, I think, as the alternative move that aims at relief, 15. …Nc6 (threatening Ng4), can be met with 16. b4 Qc7 17. Nd5 Bxd5 18. cxd5 Ne5 19. Rfc1. Interestingly, after 15. …Nfd7 black of course also threatens Nxc4 and Qxc3.

Quote:
17.Nxc6 Rxc6?!
... and an irritated me made the mistake to take back with the rook. Of course 17...bxc6 is the natural move, gaining more central influence and covering the all-important d5 square.


If your goal is to exchange pieces to decrease the pressure, why didn’t you play 17. …Qxc3 to exchange queens as well? I’m not very sure about this variation, but I was wondering if black could keep the draw after 18. Qxc3 Bxc3 19. Nd4 Bxd4 20. Bxd4 f5 21. Bd3 Nc5 22. exf5 Bxf5 21. Bxf5 gxf5. Either way I agree with you that bxc6 is preferable to Rxc6.

An undeveloping move such as 18. …Qd8 which disconnects the rooks is not something you’d eagerly play of course, so I looked at other possibilities. 18. …Bxc3 looks interesting, but I wouldn’t advise it. For example: 18. …Bxc3 19. Qxc3 Qxa4 20. Bh6 Ne5 21. Ra1 Qb5 22. cxb5 Rxc3 23. bxa6 bxa6 24. Bxa6 and the passed pawn gives white too large an advantage.
The more active 18. …Qe5 makes the e7 weakness too salient I think: 19. Nd5 Bxd5 20. exd5 Rc7. And since 18. …Qc7 loses material after 19. b5, I can only conclude that this seems to be another forced concession.

Quote:
a5?
I could still have obtained a solid position by switching to waiting tactics: 20...Rc8! , and it´s not at all clear how white is going to make use of his space advantage.


Still, I think this mistake is very understandable. How attractive is it to apply waiting tactics when you have no counterplay and are quite cramped? I think that with Rc8 you can indeed hope for a fortunate draw, but personally I even would rather play something such as 20. …f5. In itself not really a good move of course, but I find the position easier to play then from a psychological point of view. But then again I am not the defensive kind of player, so this is really a matter of taste, I think.

Quote:
Qa8 25.Bb5?!
25.Qc6! Nc5 26.Bd1! wins a pawn.


I think that therefore 24. …Nc5 was preferable.

Quote:
For the moment, black´s position looks defensible: 28.Rxb6 Nxa4 29.Rb8 Rf8 30.Rb5 Nc3 31.Rxa5 Nxb1 and black should be able to hold the draw. So white decides to improve his king safety and slowly prepare a breakthrough.

When replaying this game, I get the impression that for white the position has merely become a technical exercise already. While I think that even now he has a significant endgame advantage, he leaves nothing to coincidence. I can imagine that this is somewhat frustrating.

Quote:
After this, the game is lost. I had to sacrifice my Queen: 33...Rb8 34.a5 Qxa5 35.Ra4 Qxa4 36.Bxa4 Nxa4 37.Qb5, but I don´t like my chances to hold the position after the continuation 37...Nc5 38.Bf2 g5 39.Bxc5 dxc5 40.f4 gxf4 41.gxf4±/+-

I would surely favour white there too, as again you would be destined to passive defending without any compensation. You’re right that after Rc8 the game is over, although you could have defended a bit tougher, but I can’t blame you for that.

Now maybe I have put too much emphasis on breakthroughs in this post, but when I look back at the game I still think that the failure to free your position is where it went wrong. I’m wondering if in hindsight, you wouldn’t ultimately prefer a line with f7-f5. I don’t really know your abilities as a passive defender, but as I said I would rather play with more risk than get pushed back slowly. On top of that, I believe that against higher rated opponents this approach in itself is more successful already. But this is all in my humble opinion of course.

That being said, I think that this game may be the most instructive one so far. I really feel that I have a better understanding of this difficult opening that is so vital in my repertory. So thanks a lot again for the really comprehensive analysis and I must say that I think it is not a shame at all to lose in this way from your strong opponent.
____________

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Lews_Therin
Lews_Therin


Promising
Famous Hero
posted July 15, 2004 09:36 PM
Edited By: Lews_Therin on 15 Jul 2004

Hello Wub,

you´re right of course and I do feel quite okay with the recent tournament. Bad luck with the pairings, almost all of my mistakes were exploited by my opponents, and still a national rating performance of 2315. That´s certainly a success for me.

Quote: I see you played 2. Nc6 in this game, but in the database I noticed you occasionally prefer the hyper-accelerated move order. Is this to avoid the Rossolimo attack? But what is the drawback then; are Alapin Sicilians harder to tackle?
For database reasons I play 2...Nc6 only when I can be sure that my opponents don´t play the Rossolimo. That way I try to discourage my opponents from preparing lenghty variations after 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 g6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Qxd4.

Quote: Is this variation really considered to be the critical test of the Maroczy bind? I wouldn’t have thought that. To my knowledge, the Gurgenidze variation even was something like 5. c4 Nf6 6. Nc3 Nxd4 7. Qxd4 d6. This can’t transpose in the above position, can it?
Depends on how you define the "critical test". It´s a sideline, but a relatively dangerous one, which has been played a number of times on the highest level.
Regarding the Gurgenidze you are right, there black exchanges on d4 before the Bc1 is developed.

Quote: It does? I did see that an ill-prepared Nc2-a3 runs into a Nxe4 Nxe4 Bxb2 tactic, but it is unclear to me what that has to do with the placement of the bishop on e6/d7.
What I meant to say is: With a Bishop on e6 I am able to force b2-b3 anytime by playing Nc6-e5/a5. If my bishop is on d7 instead, white also has the option of Nc2-a3 to protect c4, which keeps the queenside unweakened but is not necessarily better.

Quote: One can wonder if in this position black can really afford the luxury to play in accordance with his personal preferences.
Of course he can , playing on the queenside and keeping his healthy pawn structure is certainly not the worse plan. But next time I think I´ll rather put the bishop to d7 or play your suggestion 10.…Ne5.

Quote: While I agree that the plan behind 10. …Rc8 seems logical, it looks like black cannot extort a b7-b5 breakthrough this way (as the game shows) nor get any other form of active counterplay. As a result, while in itself 12. …Re8!? may be a good move, strategically speaking it seems to me that it still is a concession. Also, I don’t think you play the accelerated dragon to reach this kind of positions.
I don´t think it´s so simple. In the Maroczy, it´s not unusual for black to play reactive positions - constructively wait for the white player´s choice of plan and then make use of the weaknesses that appear when he pushes pawns or concentrates pieces on one part of the board. It´s not at all easy for white to make progress without weakening himself or having some of his minor pieces exchanged. My opponent in this game failed doing so, and after his 17th move I had an equal position.

Quote:[...]10. …Ne5 11. b3 Qa5 12. Qd2 Nc6 and if white plays a ‘natural’ move such as 13. f3, black can even get an edge with 13. …Ng4. The move 13. b4 looks critical and leads to a largely forced variation though black is still well alive after: 13. …Nxb4 14. Nxb4 Qxb4 15. Rb1 Qa5 16. Rxb7 Nd7 17. Nd5 Qxd2 18. Nxe7+ Kh8 19. Bxd2 Nc5 20. Rc7 Nxe4. I must admit that I like white a bit more here, but as nothing is decided yet, it may be an alternative.
That´s a very good idea. It´s one of the points of those Nd4-c2 lines, that a Queen on a5 can very often be kicked by the b-pawn. But at this early point, white isn´t developed well enough to get an advantage out of it. I think the above line is slightly better for white, but IMO black can play better: 16.…Rf8-b8! and now taking the pawn loses an exchange to 17.Rxe7 Bf8 18.Nd5 Qxd2 19.Nxf6+ Kg7 20.Bxd2 Bxe7 -+. So white has to play 17.Rfb1 Rxb7 18.Rxb7 Bc8!, and this time after 19.Rxe7 Bf8 20.Nd5 Qxd2 21.Nxf6+ Kg7 22.Bxd2 Bxe7 23.Nd5, white has some compensation, but I don´t think he can hope for more than equality.
Strange, I wonder where white has gone wrong. In the FIDE womens´ KO 2001, Peng tried 12.Bd2. This may be better, but hardly puts the fright into my bones.

Quote: And then to think that until a few weeks ago I never heard of Kasimdzhanov . What I find remarkable in this game is that even though black performed very well strategically until this point, it appeared not enough to hold the draw. That makes one think about black’s chances as a whole in this line.
Our first 2.Bundesliga team match will be against Godesberg, where the new FIDE WC is playing on board 1 .
I don´t find the game against Vogt particularly convincing, though. Black´s play makes a very poor impression. If he for example simply goes for 17.…Nc3 18.Nxc3 Bxc3, I don´t see any advantage for white.

Quote: If your goal is to exchange pieces to decrease the pressure, why didn’t you play 17. …Qxc3 to exchange queens as well? I’m not very sure about this variation, but I was wondering if black could keep the draw after 18. Qxc3 Bxc3 19. Nd4 Bxd4 20. Bxd4 f5 21. Bd3 Nc5 22. exf5 Bxf5 21. Bxf5 gxf5. Either way I agree with you that bxc6 is preferable to Rxc6.
Hmm, the line you suggest is interesting, but looks to me like a rather unpleasant +=. White has the bishop and the better structure. It may be a matter of taste, but I prefer the position that I had in the game. (Of course I even more prefer the one with bxc6 and equality.)

Quote: An undeveloping move such as 18. …Qd8 which disconnects the rooks is not something you’d eagerly play of course, [...] only conclude that this seems to be another forced concession.
It would be desirable to have the rooks connected (Re8 and a8 for example), but apart from that, I don´t find withdrawing the queen to d8 particularly worrisome. White has spent the time I "lost" advancing his queenside, but unless I allow him to play a4-a5, I don´t see how this is going to cause me any harm. The pawns are restricting my pieces, yes, but on the other hand, white now must always take into account the possibility of a6-a5, which can give black control over the dark squares, if it´s played at the right moment.

Quote: Still, I think this mistake is very understandable. How attractive is it to apply waiting tactics when you have no counterplay and are quite cramped? I think that with Rc8 you can indeed hope for a fortunate draw, but personally I even would rather play something such as 20. …f5. In itself not really a good move of course, but I find the position easier to play then from a psychological point of view. But then again I am not the defensive kind of player, so this is really a matter of taste, I think.
I think you are overestimating white´s possibilities. What threat does he have? How does he want to make progress? In my view, 20.…Rc8 is not "hoping for a fortunate draw", but rather accepting a += position and preparing to defend it actively.
And why would you want to play 20.…f5 immediately? It seems to me that after 21.Bd3, black has only managed to weaken himself.
After 20.…Rc8, white´s play on the queenside is stopped, and the only obvious plan that I see for him is f3-f4-f5. For example 21.Bd3 Rf8 22.f4 f5, and now with black´s pawn break there actually comes some activity: Pressure on f4, the queen can be maneuvered to the kingside via f8, while white´s Be3 cannot go to g5 anymore.

Quote: I think that therefore 24. …Nc5 was preferable.
Yes, objectively it´s probably better, but the position after 25.Bb5 really looks bleak this time. In the other line, white at least had to see a good 26th move.

Quote: When replaying this game, I get the impression that for white the position has merely become a technical exercise already. While I think that even now he has a significant endgame advantage, he leaves nothing to coincidence. I can imagine that this is somewhat frustrating.
Not at all, neither the technical exercise nor the frustration. During the game I felt that I was very close to a draw, and I think by playing 32.…Bf6, I think I would have reached that goal. And when I talked to Meijers after the game, he agreed when I suggested Bg7-f6 as an improvement and also called the resuling position "a draw". It´s true that white´s pair of bishops looks very impressive, but to win the game, he has to win b6 without losing a4. I don´t think that´s possible if black defends correctly.

Quote: Now maybe I have put too much emphasis on breakthroughs in this post, but when I look back at the game I still think that the failure to free your position is where it went wrong. I’m wondering if in hindsight, you wouldn’t ultimately prefer a line with f7-f5.
Well, I already wrote something about this earlier. In my view, the breakthroughs in the Maroczy are often a matter of timing. In some lines you can hurry f7-f5 (with double-edged consequences), but in an opening where white has to tread so carefully, I think it makes alot of sense to keep options open and strike where white weakens himself. The kind of chess philosophy that you can also see in the Bd7-Nxd4-Bc6-a5 line.

Quote: I don’t really know your abilities as a passive defender, but as I said I would rather play with more risk than get pushed back slowly. On top of that, I believe that against higher rated opponents this approach in itself is more successful already. But this is all in my humble opinion of course.
When I play against lower-rated opposition, I´m always happy when they try to solve =+ positions by killing themselves . Seriously, playing solid moves and looking out for counter-chances is not what I would consider to be passive defense. And in most cases I think it´s the best thing you can do to make the opponent work hard for his point - give him many opportunities to go wrong, and make him calculate your counterplay/freeing/drawing ideas at every one of his moves ... cause him to spend as much time and energy as possible. A good player is not always good at winning a good position, and a good position is not always good enough for a win, even with best play.
____________

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Wub
Wub


Responsible
Famous Hero
posted July 22, 2004 04:34 AM
Edited By: Wub on 21 Jul 2004

Hello Lews,

Thank you for the once again detailed, useful and especially patient explanations . Upon studying your reply, I noticed that most of your corrections had to do with me not sufficiently understanding the strategic plans of the opening or -as you call it- the ‘reactive positions’ that often result from the bind. For example, my insisting on an f7-f5 breakthrough, my dissatisfaction with the queen’s retreat, the line I proposed which led to a +/= endgame and a few more, they all spring from my ill comprehension. Most notable is that I thought white already had a winning position fairly early, so when I read that at move 17 you could have reached an equal position and that 32. …Bf6 would probably have led to a draw, I had to change my view quite a bit. On top of that, my chess playing style is more focused at getting an early initiative and grabbing space, than building a solid position and defending it. But since I realize that the latter style is also needed, I decided to restudy your game but now with this other mindset.

Quote:
12...Re8!?
In many lines it´s important to have e7 covered, as sooner or later a knight will appear on d5. No matter if I exchange on d5 or not, pawn e7 will be the main target in my camp.


Now that I am less focused on aggressive breakthroughs, it’s easier for me to understand the positional merits of your ‘semi-waiting move’. A clear illustration of the weakness of e7 and the importance of this pawn would be the variation 12. …Ne5 13. b3 Qa5? 14. Nd5 Qxd2? 15. Nxe7+ Kh8 16. Bxd2, where black seems to be able to win back the pawn with 16. …Rc7 17. Nd5 Nxd5 18. exd5 Bxd5, but the absence of pawn e7 is felt after 20. Ba5 Rc8 21. Rad1.

Quote:
I think the above line is slightly better for white, but IMO black can play better: 16.…Rf8-b8! and now taking the pawn loses an exchange to 17.Rxe7 Bf8 18.Nd5 Qxd2 19.Nxf6+ Kg7 20.Bxd2 Bxe7 -+.

Yes, I also think that 16. …Rfb8 is an improvement, though white too can improve on the above line: 17. Rxe7 Bf8 18. Rxe6 fxe6 19. e5! Still, after 19. …dxe5 20 Nd5 Qxd2 21. Nxf6+ Kg7 22. Bxd2 Kxf6 23. Bf3, black keeps the better game with 23. …Rb2.

Quote:
So white has to play 17.Rfb1 Rxb7 18.Rxb7 Bc8!

I’m not so sure about the undeveloping move 18. …Bc8, as it allows white to exploit black’s weak back rank, for example: 19. Rb5 Qc7 20. e5! and there are too many weaknesses in the black position. So instead of Bc8 black must somehow defend e7 and then I think white keeps his advantage.

Quote:
Strange, I wonder where white has gone wrong.

Aside from the above suggestion which may be an improvement for white, white is not forced to play the sharp 13. b4 of course. Rab1 to prepare that move seems OK to me.

Quote:
Our first 2.Bundesliga team match will be against Godesberg, where the new FIDE WC is playing on board 1 .

Are you serious!? Makes one wonder why Kazimdzhanov isn’t playing in the 1. Bundesliga. Nevertheless, I am very curious of that match, please keep me informed .

Quote:
I think you are overestimating white´s possibilities. What threat does he have? How does he want to make progress? In my view, 20.…Rc8 is not "hoping for a fortunate draw", but rather accepting a += position and preparing to defend it actively.

Point taken on my careless f7-f5. However, I think that white can quite effectively make progress against 20. …Rc8 with 21. c5. For example: 21. …dxc5 22. Bxa6 Rb8 23. Nf4 Nf8 24. Qxd8 Rexd8 25. bxc5 bxc5 26. Rxb8 Rxb8 27. Rxc5. Or 21. …Bxd5 22. exd5 bxc5 23. Bxa6 Rc7 24. bxc5 dxc5 25. a5.

Quote:
A good player is not always good at winning a good position, and a good position is not always good enough for a win, even with best play.

Okay, I will print this out and hang it above my bed .
____________

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Pirahna
Pirahna


Famous Hero
or not ...
posted July 23, 2004 10:51 PM

WOW ... heroes players playing chess .... count me in !!!

I'm just an occasional player ... so ...
____________
The Pirahna - wow guys ... my posts keep decreasing ... lol ... i can't post

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Lews_Therin
Lews_Therin


Promising
Famous Hero
posted July 31, 2004 10:42 PM
Edited By: Lews_Therin on 31 Jul 2004

Hello Wub!

I checked your suggestions and - damn - they´re all correct. 20. ...Rc8 21.c5! is very convincing, and your e5 breakthroughs are working perfectly well, too. Then either 18. ...Kf8 or the endgame you had proposed earlier. Your alternative 13.Rab1 is a good idea, too. 13.Rab1 Ng4 14.b4 Qe5 Qxc3 15.Qxc3 Bxc3 16.Bxe6 fxe6 17.Rfd1 leads to another unpleasant += ending.
I´ll have to look at that game again, and update my annotations.

Yesterday I came home from Biel where I played for the first time, in the Master Open. What a great chess festival ... the GM tournament with Moro and Ponomariov on the stage, some very nice looking grandmistresses in the ladies´ tournament, and around 300 more players in the two opens.

I managed to score 6/11 with an Elo performance of 2353, which means that my new Elo rating of October will be around 2307. And in my second round game against Peter Wells I scored my first win over a grandmaster. Maybe I´ll find the time to analyse it in the next days ... I have not even looked at it with the computer yet - hopefully Fritz won´t refute my several pawn sacrifices there too badly .

By the way, while I prepared for my game against Cebalo (who I wrongly expected to play the Benoni), I found a nice opening solution for my game against Korchnoi. Here´s what I added to its annotations today:
11...Nbd7! is the move that casts doubt on white´s ambitious setup, quickly vacating b8 square to prepare for 12.Qc2 c4 13.a4 Rb8 14.axb5 axb5 and black is fine. White´s plan to get control of the c4 square has obviously failed, and now his pieces are nowhere in position to capitalize on the now weakened point d4. 15.b4 cxb3 16.Qxb3 0-0 17.0-0 Sc5 18.Db4? Sxd5! 19.Lxd8 Sxb4 20.Lc7 Tb7 21.Lxd6 Lxc3 22.Lxc5 Td8 =+ Z.Polgar-Suba, Dortmund 1985
16.Nxb3 looks more logical, but after 16. ...Qc7 one doesn´t want to be white again.
____________

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
bjorn190
bjorn190


Responsible
Supreme Hero
Jebus maker
posted July 31, 2004 10:51 PM

Uhm..

Can someone please make a Homm3 chessgame?  with actual units from h3?

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Wub
Wub


Responsible
Famous Hero
posted August 07, 2004 04:28 AM

Hey Lews,

I’m very glad to hear you performed so well in Biel! With your new Elo of 2300+, am I right you have achieved your FIDE Master title? That would be great news! Also, congratulations on your first win against a Grandmaster . That’s a lot better than that miserable draw against that GM in Bad Wörishofen . One may start to wonder where this will end. Because considering your performances last months, obviously there still appears to be quite some progress in your chess playing skills. I can think of a logical next step….

Well, what more is there to say about your latest game…it’s good to hear you liked my suggestions. Personally I would choose 13. b4 over 13. Rab1, as for white the position after 18. …Kf8 in the former line is in my opinion preferable over 13. Rab1 Ng4 14. b4 and now 14. …Bxc3 15. Qxc3 Qe5 16. Qxe5 Ngxe5 17. Na3 a5. Here white seems to be somewhat worse than I thought at first. But I may already be straying from what is actually useful for you to annotate.

Your suggested improvement in the game against Korchnoi makes a lot of sense to me. In the database I too found that game where Cebalo played this 11. …Nbd7. I must say it is admiring how precise your opening preparation for a game is, if you studied that game surprise him with some sort of novelty.

I look forward to your game against Peter Wells, but no need to hurry of course.


Quote:
WOW ... heroes players playing chess .... count me in !!!

Well Pirahna, I hope the chess notation doesn’t look overly frightening .
____________

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Lews_Therin
Lews_Therin


Promising
Famous Hero
posted August 07, 2004 07:39 PM

Hello Wub,

thank you , yes, it was very nice to finally once not spoil my chances against a strong opponent.
But I expect it to end somewhere near where I am right now ... my calculation abilities are very weak for a 2300 player, and that´s a very difficult thing to improve at advanced age.

And well, yes, my opening preperation quite often is very deep, but I hardly ever manage to make it appear on the board . In Biel I think I spent about 15-20 hours preparing on my games ... well, it was good opening training in any case .

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 d5 4.g3 dxc4
This is the starting position of the Open Catalan. After white has commited his light square bishop to the long diagonal, black takes the pawn c4 - either to defend the extra pawn or to force concesssions when white wins it back. 5.Lg2 a6 This came as a suprise for me, as in earlier games, Wells had prefered the less risky (and less ambitious) lines 5...Be7 6.Qc2 a6 7.Qxc4 b5 8.Qc2 Bb7 and 5...Bd7 6.Ne5 Bc6 7.Nxc6 Nxc6
6.0-0 Sc6
Transposing into one of black´s main choices to play the Catalan (where the "bookish" move order is 5. ...Nc6 and then either 6. ...Rb8 or 6. ...a6). Blocking the c7 pawn looks strange, but the knight actually is very well positioned on c6. The pressure on d4 and the control of the e5 square prevent all of white´s natural approaches to winning back the pawn on c4: Qd1-c2, Nb1-d2, Nf3-e5. Later on, the knight has the option to support an e6-e5 push, cover the gambit pawn by Nc6-a5, or (after a white e2-e4) move towards d3 via b4.
6...b5 is another less subtle way to defend c4.
I was rather unhappy about my opponent´s choice of line. I had more or less deeply studied most serious variations of the Catalan, some before the tournament and some before the game. This one (Nb8-c6 and a7-a6) was the exception. So, having landed on my opponent´s territory, I decided to avoid a theoretical discussion and instead play a somewhat dubious gambit, (correctly) assuming that Wells would be on his own there, too.
7.Na3!?
Black is now forced to part with his pair of bishops. In return, he gets a mighty covered passed extra pawn.
7...Bxa3 8.bxa3
There are many gambit lines in the Catalan, where white allows black to defend his pawn on c4 and in return gets a strong pawn centre. Here there is an important difference, though: With his doubled a-pawns, white hardly has any chance to sensibly attack black´s queenside, and win back the extra pawn - he lacks the possibility of a well-timed b2-b3. Also, as a passed pawn c4 is much stronger here than in the "normal" lines. All endgames should be hopelessly losing, so white is obliged to play for mate.
8...Rb8 9.Bb2 b5 10.Qc2 Bb7 11.Rad1
Immediately after I made this move, it came as a shock to me, seeing my opponent´s possibility. I could simply have played 11.e4 0-0 12.Rad1 , leading to the position that I had initially been aiming for. After another moment I saw a possibility to fight against my opponent´s following move and relaxed a bit, telling myself that it´s quite a risky thing even for a grandmaster, keeping the king in the centre even longer.
11...Ne7?!
A greedy move. Having prevented e2-e4, black now threatens to shut me down completely by playing Bb7-e4 and building a blockade on the light squares.
12.d5!
Anything else and black has a winning position.
12...exd5 13.Bxf6 gxf6 14.e4
Now white´s compensation is obvious, as black´s king will have difficulties finding a safe place. I think that from a computer perspective, black may be even winning here, but it´s not at all easy to defend for a human player.
14...c6 15.Qc1
Played after more than 30 minutes of thinking (I caught up with my opponent on the clock here). The Queen belongs on the dark squares here, to exploit black´s holes in the kingside.
15...Qd6?!
The computer suggestion is 15...0-0 16.Qh6 Re8! 17.Rfe1 (17.e5 Ng6 18.Rd4 c5 19.Rh4 Nxh4 20.exf6 Nf5 21.Qg5+ Kh8 22.Qxf5 Bc8-+) 17...Ng6 18.Nd4 Qe7 19.exd5 (19.Nf5 Qf8 20.Qh5 and white certainly doesn´t have enough compensation for two pawns.) 19...Qxe1+ 20.Rxe1 Rxe1+ 21.Bf1 Bc8 22.dxc6 and the position is very difficult to assess, but black looks preferable to me.
16.Rfe1?
16.Qh6 is stronger, to prevent castling and threaten e4-e5. I did not play it because of black´s answer 16...Rd8 , which threatens f6-f5 and forces me to release the central tension. But after 17.exd5 cxd5 18.Rfe1 , white has good compensation for the sacrificed material, and a very pleasant position to play.
16.Rfe1 forces black to move his king out of the centre, as 17.Qh6 becomes considerably stronger, with the rook being developed. Unfortunately, after castling black can defend succesfully, and much easier than it was a move earlier.
16...Kd8?!
Black returns the favor. 16...0-0 17.Dh6 Rbd8 and it´s difficult to get through now. 18.Nh4
a) 18...f5!? 19.Qg5+ Kh8 20.exd5 Nxd5 21.Nxf5 Qg6 22.Qh4 f6 and 23.Nd4 fails to 23...Nc3
b) One of many ways to go wrong for black is 18...d4?! 19.Bh3 f5 20.Qg5+ Kh8 21.e5 Qe6 22.Nxf5 Nxf5 [or 22...Ng6 23.Rxd4 Rxd4 24.Nxd4 Qe7 (24...Qxh3 25.Qf6+ Kg8 26.Nf5) 25.Qh6 Bc8 26.Bxc8 Rxc8 27.Nf5 Qf8 28.Qg5±]
23.Bxf5 f6 24.Qf4 fxe5 25.Rxe5 Qd6 26.Qh4 Rf7 27.Rde1 Rdf8 28.Re7 Qf6 29.Qxf6+ Rxf6 30.Rxh7+ Kg8 31.Ree7 Rb8 32.Reg7+ Kf8 33.Rg5 d3 34.Rh8+ Ke7 35.Rg7+ Kd6 36.Rxb8 Rxf5 37.Rd8+ Kc5 38.Rxb7 Rd5 39.Rxd5+ cxd5 40.Kf1 c3 41.Rc7+ Kd4 42.Ke1+-
c) 18...Bc8! 19.exd5 cxd5 20.Be4 f5 21.Qg5+ Kh8 22.Bxd5 Bxd5 23.Rxd5 h6 24.Qh5 Qf6 and black seems to hold off white´s attack.
The above variations are certainly not complete, it´s just what I managed to put together in a few hours during a nightshift. But it seems to me that castling gives black enough defensive resources.
On the other hand, the idea to move the king to the queenside instead looks very logical here, and it´s actually what I was afraid of the most, during the game. But white is able to reduce black´s 5-pawn shield to merely two pawns ...
17.a4 Kc7 18.axb5 axb5 19.a4 bxa4
Black had the choice to either keep b+c or c+d pawns as the king´s cover. The decision to keep the central file closed and eat a third pawn on a4 on the way looks like a sensible one. On the other hand, the weak link d5 may become very weak now ...
19...Qc5 20.axb5 cxb5 21.Nd4 looks like good compensation for white, too.
20.Nd4 Ba6?
no better is 20...Bc8 21.exd5 cxd5 22.Bxd5! Nxd5 23.Qxc4+ Kb7 24.Qb5+ Ka8 25.Qa5+ Ba6 26.Nf5±
Black´s best choice would have been 20...Ba8! 21.exd5 cxd5 22.Qc3 Rb4 23.Nc2 Rb6 24.Qa5 Rhb8 25.Qxa4 (25.Ne3 Qb4) 25...Bc6 26.Qa7+ (Avoiding all those forced tactics may be white´s best: 26.Qa5!? Ra8 27.Qc3 and I would rather not be asked to assess this. Black has all pieces in play now, but there´s still his king who will never be safe as long as the queens are on the board, and the weak kingside pawns will become targets, too.) 26...Bb7 27.Na3 (Unfortunately not sufficient is the tactical madness 27.Rxe7+ Qxe7 28.Ne3 Qxe3 29.fxe3 Ra8 30.Qxb6+ Kxb6 31.Rb1+ Kc6 32.e4 c3 33.exd5+ Kd6-+) 27...Ra8 28.Qxb6+ Qxb6 29.Rxe7+ Kd8 30.Nxc4 Qb3 31.Rde1 Qxc4 32.Rxb7 Qc3 33.Rf1 Ra1 34.Rxf7 Rxf1+ 35.Bxf1 h6=+ and even though the position should be a draw, as white only needs one more of black´s kingside pawns to sacrifice his bishop for the d-pawn and build a fortress, there´s still alot of room for black to make winning attempts.
21.exd5 cxd5 22.Nf5!± Nxf5 23.Rxd5 Qb4 24.Rxf5 Rb6!
Black does a very good job at defending the vulnerable squares and organising active counterplay at the same time.
25.Qf4+ Rd6
25...Qd6 loses after 26.Rc5+ Kb8 27.Qxd6+ Rxd6 28.Rb1+ Ka7 29.Rc7+
26.Rd1
26.Re7+ Kd8
26...Re8
Now I used up of most of my remaining time without finding a clear win. So I opted for a line which I was sure would be extremely unpleasant to play for my opponent in the following time scramble (me about 4 minutes, Wells a little more than 2 minutes left, if I remember correctly.)
27.Rxf6 Re1+ 28.Rxe1 Qxe1+ 29.Bf1 Qd1 30.Rxf7+ Kb6 31.Qe3+ Qd4 32.Qe7 Ka5 33.Rf5+ Kb6 34.Rf8 Rd7?
It´s almost impossible to keep your king alive with only seconds on the clock and hunted over the board by heavy pieces. Playing fast, I missed the first chance to finish the game ...
35.Tf6+?
35.Qb4++-
35...Ka5 36.Qe6 Bb5 37.Rf5 Kb4?
... but was lucky to get a second one and took it.
38.Qe1+
In this hopeless position, black overstepped time.
1-0
____________

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Wub
Wub


Responsible
Famous Hero
posted August 20, 2004 05:01 AM

Hello Lews,

I have looked a bit through the chessplayer database and I noticed that quite a lot of famous players reached their top not earlier than their early to mid thirties. Also, you probably did take a look on your ELO graphics in the database and you must admit that this up going line looks quite encouraging . But we’ll see what is yet to come…

I must say that I was completely ignorant whatsoever about the (open) Catalan, but your explanations helped a lot. Playing that offbeat gambit does not seem like a bad choice; in fact I think it makes a lot of sense to prepare some nasty sideline when facing a strong opponent with (presumably) superior opening knowledge. Still, I must agree that with good play of black, white does probably not have sufficient compensation. Personally, as black I would castle at move eight already since there is enough time to defend the c4 pawn anyway. In a game Shipov-Ivanov (1998) black won convincingly after 8. …0-0 9. Bb2 Rb8 10. Qc2 b5 11. Rad1 Rb6 12. e4 Bb7 13. Ng5 Nd7 14. h4 h6 15. Nh3 Re8 16. Nf4 e5. If I were to play this opening with white I would try to get f2-f4 in though, to increase my spatial advantage and thus hopefully mount a successful attack on the king.

Quote:
12.d5!
Anything else and black has a winning position.


Here I have looked at the response 12. …Nexd5 to give back material after 13. e4 c6 14. exd5 cxd5 and get a solid pawn structure and two central passed pawns. It doesn’t work out however, since white controls the black squares too firmly as the following computer variation nicely shows:
15. Bc3 0-0 16. a4 Re8 17. axb5 axb5 18. Qb2 Qe7 19. Rfe1 Ba6 20. Nd4 Qd6 21. a3 and black’s pawns will have to remain fixed.

Quote:
15.Qc1
Played after more than 30 minutes of thinking (I caught up with my opponent on the clock here). The Queen belongs on the dark squares here, to exploit black´s holes in the kingside.


After staring at the position for considerable time I must come to the same conclusion: the computer idea a3-a4 is the wrong plan (at least when playing a human opponent) and the alternative 15. Rfe1 is too slow. So I think you found the best move here.

Quote:
15…Qd6?!
The computer suggestion is 15...0-0 […] and the position is very difficult to assess, but black looks preferable to me.


I too think that black can hold very well, not only in the line you posted but also after for example 18. …Qd6. After 22. dxc6 both players must be very careful indeed, but I as well think that black is better here because his passed pawn is the stronger while white’s threats against the white king aren’t much more problematic than the threat on h3 and the pinned bishop. For example: 22. …c3 23. Nc2 Rd1 24. Ne3 Rd2 25. h4 c2 26. Nf5 Bxf5 27. Qxd2 Bc8 28. c7 Nf8 -/+.

Quote:
16.Rfe1?
16.Qh6 is stronger, to prevent castling and threaten e4-e5. I did not play it because of black´s answer 16...Rd8 , which threatens f6-f5 and forces me to release the central tension.


Releasing the tension can be postponed by 17. Qg7 which seems like a reasonable move, though I must admit that I personally like 17. exd5 more, too.

Quote:
16...Kd8?!
Black returns the favor. 16...0-0 17.Dh6 Rbd8 and it´s difficult to get through now.


I have looked at quite a few lines too, but I can’t find any advantage for white either. In fact, in your critical variation c, 22. Bxd5 is nothing else than a draw offer and black has enough resources to refuse even that easily.

In my opinion, the simple 20. exd5 is better for white than 20. Nd4. If black plays 20. cxd5, then 21. Nd2 seems very strong (21. …Qc5 22. Nxc4; 21. …Ba6 22. Ne4 and the black king is driven away from his pawn shield while white’s piece are also a lot more active).

20… Ba6?
Black´s best choice would have been 20...Ba8! 21.exd5 cxd5 22.Qc3 […]


I must say that the computer variations that result from these positions are very captivating. How can I argue against a computer analysis in such a tactical slugfest? What seems logical to me is 22. Bf1 in order to sweep away black’s pawn front. With all those tactics it is hard to give a sane analysis of this, but the computer gives: 22. Bf1 Rhe8 23. Bxc4 dxc4 24. Qxc4+ Ba6 25. Rc1 Rb4 26. Nb5+ Rxb5 27. Qxb5 Kd7 28. Qe2 Rb8 29. Qh5 Ke8 30. Rcd1 Qc7 31. Qxh7 Kf8 32. Qh6+ Kg8 33. Qxf6 Ng6 and white has a clear advantage in my opinion.

Your 22. Nf5 is a very nice move, leading to a position where it is practically impossible for black to defend his king from being harassed. Using the computer to analyse the resulting positions feels a bit ‘unreal’ to me. My program assesses the game after 25. Qf4+ as exactly equal (!) while from a human perspective black is in very deep trouble. But for what it is worth, 25. …Kc8 is probably superior to 25. …Rd6, which sounds logical, as I don’t see why black should let his rook get pinned.

The rest of the game was simply a matter of keeping pressure and waiting for him to make a mistake and indeed with 2 minutes for 14 (!) moves in such a position it is nearly impossible for black to survive. It is striking however that in some variations the computer seems to advise black to avoid a draw by repetition .

All in all I think you played this game very well, though from a theoretical point of view I agree that your opening choice was not optimal. I think the most significant improvement was indeed 16. Qh6 over 16. Rfe1, but for the rest especially your strategic play seemed excellent to me. A deserved victory!

Thanks again for posting this game and I hope you have a good vacation .
____________

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Lews_Therin
Lews_Therin


Promising
Famous Hero
posted August 21, 2004 09:57 AM
Edited By: Lews_Therin on 21 Aug 2004

Hello Wub!

Quote: I have looked a bit through the chessplayer database and I noticed that quite a lot of famous players reached their top not earlier than their early to mid thirties. Also, you probably did take a look on your ELO graphics in the database and you must admit that this up going line looks quite encouraging .
Yes , I still find it hard to believe what happened in the ~30 games after my bad tournament in Vlissingen last year´s summer and my first round blunder in the team championships. But there´s a reason for my constant pessimism: In my post-mortem sessions with players above 2300, I always feel like my opponent is vastly superior - they not only see more than I do, but also more quickly and with more precision. On the other hand, there must be a reason why I´m able to play on an almost 2400 level and they are (most often) not. My best explanation so far is that there´s a large gap between my concentration ability during the game and afterwards. I can´t put together any clear and deep thoughts when there´s someone waiting for me to suggest a move. Well, better than the other way around, I suppose .
Part of my explanation is also, that the trend is going to reverse at any moment ...

Quote: In a game Shipov-Ivanov (1998) black won convincingly after 8. …0-0 9. Bb2 Rb8 10. Qc2 b5 11. Rad1 Rb6 12. e4 Bb7 13. Ng5 Nd7 14. h4 h6 15. Nh3 Re8 16. Nf4 e5. If I were to play this opening with white I would try to get f2-f4 in though, to increase my spatial advantage and thus hopefully mount a successful attack on the king.
Yes , of all games that were played in this line, this is the critical one for white. When I played the opening, I knew that there was a convincing defensive idea for black, involving Rb8-b6 and Qd8-a8, but it seemed unlikely to me that a player below 2700 would find that at the board .
You are right that Nf3-h4 and f2-f4-f5 would be desirable for white, but black is able to put alot of pressure on white´s centre. For example 13.Nh4 Ne7 14.f4 Qa8, and even after 15.Rde1, I don´t see what white can do with his f-pawn. F4-f5 can always be answered by e6xf5 followed by Rb6-e6.

Quote: I too think that black can hold very well, not only in the line you posted but also after for example 18. …Qd6.
Yes, you´re right, that´s much easier than 18. …Qe7.

Quote: In my opinion, the simple 20. exd5 is better for white than 20. Nd4.[...]
Yes, that´s very strong. As the computer was able to reach an unclear position with 20.…Ba8, it´s very nice to find such a logical thread in white´s favour after black played Ke8-d8 .

Quote: What seems logical to me is 22. Bf1 in order to sweep away black’s pawn front. With all those tactics it is hard to give a sane analysis of this, but the computer gives: 22. Bf1 Rhe8 23. Bxc4 dxc4 24. Qxc4+ Ba6 25. Rc1 Rb4 26. Nb5+ Rxb5 27. Qxb5 Kd7 28. Qe2 Rb8 29. Qh5 Ke8 30. Rcd1 Qc7 31. Qxh7 Kf8 32. Qh6+ Kg8 33. Qxf6 Ng6 and white has a clear advantage in my opinion.
Good idea, but it seems to be that 22.…Rhc8 is stronger, to meet 23.Bxc4 with 23.…Kd7.

Quote: But for what it is worth, 25. …Kc8 is probably superior to 25. …Rd6, which sounds logical, as I don’t see why black should let his rook get pinned.
Again you have a point here, 25. …Kc8 is an improvement on the game. But it seems like after 26.Bf1 Kb7 27.Rc1, I can happily go hunting for pawns all over the board, and black has neither king safety nor counterplay.

Quote: It is striking however that in some variations the computer seems to advise black to avoid a draw by repetition .
Yes , in these "open-king-positions", the computer plays in god mode, especially for the defending side. I often find it difficult in my annotations to find a balance between striving for objective assessments, and regarding the fact that in human chess, these assessments are often not very relevant.

Quote: All in all I think you played this game very well, [...]
Thank you . It was a very pleasant experience, and it´s beginning to dawn on me that my chess style may be not as boring and dispassionate as I always thought. (I´ve had that reputation for many years.)

Quote: Thanks again for posting this game and I hope you have a good vacation .
Thanks again, and this time it´s even going to be a real vacation - no chess, just me and a very nice woman and 7 days of totally relaxing at the sea .

I´ll try to post the Cebalo game before I leave, just need to check a few lines in the opening first.
____________

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Lews_Therin
Lews_Therin


Promising
Famous Hero
posted August 23, 2004 05:47 AM

And here is my game against Miso Cebalo :

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. Be2 O-O 6. Nf3 e5 7. O-O Nc6 8. d5 Ne7 9. Ne1 Nd7
My round 6 opponent played the very rare move 9... h6 here. The idea is to transfer the e7-knight via g6 to f4. Lines of this kind are a good test - "do I actually understand what I am playing?" - as I was out of theory and out of the usual 9.Ne1 10.Be3 patterns. 10. Be3 Ne8 11. c5 g5 12. a4 dxc5 13. Bxc5 Nd6 14. a5 a6 15. Nc2 f5 16. f3 Rf6 17. Ne3 f4 18. Nc4 Rg6 19. Qb3 h5 20. Bxd6 cxd6 21. Qb6 Qxb6+ 22. Nxb6 Rb8 23. Nca4 Bf6 24. Rac1 Kf7 25. Rc7 Rg8 26. Rfc1 Rd8 27. R1c4 g4 28. Nxc8 Rdxc8 29. fxg4 hxg4 30. Bxg4 Rd8 31. Rb4 Bh4 32. Kf1 Kg8 33. Rbxb7 Rxb7 34. Rxb7 Ng6 35. Nb6 Rf8 36. Be6+ Kh8 37. Bf5 Ne7 38. Bg4 Bg5 39. Nc4 Rd8 40. Ke2 f3+ 41. Bxf3 Ng6 42. g3 Kg8 43. Bg4 Nf8 44. Bf5 Bc1 45. b4 1-0
10. Be3 f5 11. f3 f4 12. Bf2 g5 13. a4
Well, alot can be said about the subtleties of this 9.Ne1 new mainline. White's queenside play almost always starts with the move c4-c5. This move is prevented, as long as black's knight is standing on d7. White could spit a tempo by playing b2-b4 or Ne1-d3, but in this line, losing a tempo usually means losing the game. So white's task is to make moves that will be useful after the c4-c5 advance, as black cannot easily make progress with a knight standing on d7.
13... a5
This has evolved to become black's main move in this position. Black builds a blockade on the dark squares. While this is both time-consuming and weakening, it also radically prevents the kind of queenside play that white has been aiming for, forcing the other player to redeploy his pieces.
The main alternative here is 13... Ng6, and after white's response 14. a5 black faces an interesting dilemma. 14... Nf6? is out of the question of course - white gets c4-c5 "for free" and has a huge advantage after 15.c5 Tf7 16.cxd6 cxd6 17.Sb5 g4 18.Lxa7±.
Black has two main alternatives:
14... Rf7 The most principled and obvious move. Making bishop and rook change places is as standard as a standard maneuvre can be in the 9.Ne1 King's Indian. However, white has a dangerous tactical resource here that exploits black's vulnerability on the a2-g8 diagonal: 15. c5 Nxc5 16. Bxc5 dxc5 17. a6 b6 18. Bc4, and even though theory may not be entirely clear about this, it's certainly not the kind of position that one wants who plays the King's Indian classical main line as black.
The sharpest and most typical King's Indian position can be reached by 14... h5. It must be said that black makes a concession here. Pushing the h-pawn is necessary when white defends with a knight on f2 and a pawn on h3, but in positions with a bishop on f2, it's often a loss of tempo, and the h5 pawn may even hinder black's attack, by occupying a square that could later be used by the knight. Now white has a large number of possibilities, best of them seems to be 15. Nb5!, making black's last move superfluous. The pre-c5 knight's leap is usually inferior, because by neglecting the protection of the e4 pawn, it permits a quick Nd7-f6 and g5-g4. (Before I worked on this analysis, I regarded the simple 15. b4 as white's best choice. Black has lost a tempo, so I lose one myself to enforce white's ideal position. Unfortunately it fails to a strong Zwischenzug: 15... Nf6 16. c5 g4 17. cxd6 g3! and black's attack strikes first.) 15... Nf6 16. Nxa7 Bd7 (16... g4 17. Nxc8 g3 is also played) 17. c5 leads to a sharp position. The results are clearly in white's favour.
14. Nd3 b6 15. b4
In a game between the two strong grandmasters Nielsen-Kotronias, white played a similar setup to what I did in the game, but without an immediate b2-b4. This saves two moves, but on the other hand enables black to keep hold of a5. 15. Be1 Nf6 16. Nf2 h5 17. h3 Kh8 18. Nb5 Neg8 19. b4 Rf7! It's unusual that the defending side prefers to keep a potentially weak pawn such as a5 on the board, but in this case it does a great job of keeping white's heavy pieces and the Be1 out.
15... axb4 16. Nxb4
16. Nb5 is an important alternative. The idea is to save time by taking back with the bishop. The problem is as often white's e4 pawn: 16... Nf6 17. Be1 g4 and black saves alot of time, too.
16... Nf6 17. Be1
There's actually an idea behind white's paradoxical-looking and time-consuming maneuvres: Without a4-a5 there's no progress on the queenside. Without a bishop on the e1-a5 diagonal, there's no a4-a5. I wasn't prepared for this, as Cebalo had never played the line before, but I remembered that the recommendation from NIC yearbook 69 is to withdraw the knight back to d3, and keep the other knight on c3 as long as possible. So that's what I did. Unfortunately I don't have that yearbook myself - it would be interesting to see whether it suggests an improvement on my play, as I'm not able to find one right now: 17. Nd3 Rf7, and as 18. Nb5?! runs into 18... g4, I don't see any way to avoid transposing into the game.
A popular continuation here is 17. Nc6 Nxc6 (Jussupow proposes 17... Qd7 here, but it seems to me that white is clearly better after18. c5!) 18. dxc6 Qe8 19. Nd5 with unclear play according to Jussupow.
17... Rf7
The alternative setup for black is 17... Kh8 18. Nd3 h5 19. h3 Neg8 20. Nf2 Nh6
18. Nd3 Bf8 19. Nf2
White provides extra cover for e4 and g4, "unbinding" the Nc3 and making the final preparations for the a4-a5 advance. Unfortunately there doesn't seem to be enough firepower left now to burn down black's queenside. 19... h5 20. h3 Rg7 21. Nb5 c6!?
The normal continuation would have been 21... Ng6 22. a5 bxa5 23. Rxa5 Rxa5 24. Bxa5 Nh4, and we have a rare mexican stand-off, the pressure on the respective critical squares c7 and g4 is enough to bind forces, but not sufficient to break through, for example 25. Na7 Bd7 26. Nb5 Bc8= That's what I meant in my comments on the 19th move.
22. dxc6 Nxc6 23. Ra2 Be6 24. Bc3 Qd7
24... Na5 25. Bxa5 Rxa5 26. Rd2 Qa8 27. Rxd6!? Bxd6 28. Qxd6 Qc8 29. Qxe5 Rg6 30. Rd1 Nd7 31.Qd6 Qc5 leads to a rather equal position
25. Rd2 Rd8 26. a5!
Immediately after the game I thought that white might have time for 26. Bb2, maneuvering the bishop to a3. With the black e7 knight standing on the queenside and not on h4, the pressure on g2 is pretty harmless. Unfortunately black easily invades via the h-file, where there's no Nh4 standing in the way: 26... g4 27. hxg4 hxg4 28. fxg4 Nxg4 29. Bxg4 Bxg4 30. Nxg4 Rxg4 31. Ba3 Rh4 and 32. ...Qh7, with a strong attack.
The same goes for 26. Qc2 g4 27. hxg4 hxg4 28. fxg4 Nxg4 29. Nxg4 Bxg4 30. Bxg4 Rxg4 31. Rfd1 Qh7 32. Nxd6 Rh4
26... g4!
26... bxa5 27. Nxd6 Bxd6 28. c5 Bxc5 29. Rxd7 Rgxd7 30. Qa4 Rd6 31. Bc4 seems to be better for white, who will benefit from every further simplification.
27. hxg4 hxg4 28. fxg4 Qb7?!
Cebalo decided to sacrifice the d6 pawn in order to exert pressure on the a7-g1 diagonal. This is a very nice idea, but probably too time-consuming to work out well. It was the right moment to play 28... bxa5! instead, and now it was my intention to continue 29. Nxd6? (white's best chance seems to be 29. c5 d5 30. exd5 Nxd5 31. Ne4, and now a possible line is 31... Qf7 32. Qa1 Nxc3 33. Qxc3 Rxd2 34. Qxd2 Bxg4 35. Nbd6 Bxd6 36. Nxd6 Qd7, and as much as I hate it, I don't know anything better to say than "unclear".) 29... Bxd6 30. c5 Nxg4!! 31. Rxd6 (or 31. Bxg4 Bxg4 32. Qb3+ Be6 33. Qd1 Qf7 34. cxd6 f3 -+) 31... Ne3 32. Rxd7 Rxg2+ 33. Kh1 Rxd7 34. Rg1 Rh7+ 35. Bh5 Nxd1 36. Rxg2+ Kf8 37. Nxd1 Rxh5+ 38. Rh2 Rg5 -+)
29. Nxd6 Qb8 30. Nf5 Rxd2 31. Qxd2 Rd7 32. Qb2 Bc5 33. Bf3 Bxc4 At first I felt rather miserable about losing this pawn, but looking at the bright side, now my "pawn" on f3 finally leaves his imprisonment, and even turns out to become my strongest minor piece.
34. Be2!
34. Rb1 b5 looks very dangerous for a the white (human) player, and leads to another uncalculable mess after 35. g5 Nh7 36. g6 Ng5 37. Kh1 Qe8 38. Nh4
34... Be6
34... Bxe2? 35. Qxe2. and suddenly it's white who has crushing kingside play, for example 35... Nxa5 36. g5 Nh7 37. g6 Nf6 38. Qa2+ +-
35. Bb5 bxa5!
A very surprising and radical solution. Worse is 35... Qc7 36. Qe2 and white has strong kingside threats again.
36. Bxc6 Qxb2 37. Bxb2 Rd2 38. Bxe5?!
Initially my idea was to interpose 38. Nh6+ Kh7, as now both pawns e4 and g4 are protected for the moment. But I found it difficult to completely calculate the consequences with so many pieces hanging and my time running out - so when I was down to one minute, I decided to take the draw.
After 39. Bxe5 Bc4 40. Bxf4 Ra2 41. Rc1 Bxf2+ 42. Kh2 Be6 +/=, white has two extra pawns, but I'm doubtful that they are sufficient for a win - weak, isolated, doubled, controlled by the opponent's king, and black has a dangerous a-pawn running down the other side of the board.
38... Nxg4 39. Nh6+ Nxh6 40. Bxf4 Rxf2 41. Rxf2 Ng4 42. Bg3 Bb3 43. Bd7 ½-½
____________

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Wub
Wub


Responsible
Famous Hero
posted August 30, 2004 04:37 AM

Hello Lews,

Welcome back, I hope you had a relaxing week . I’m still analyzing your game against Cebalo, because especially the extensive opening theory is quite complicated. It is hard to argue with 10 years of studying the King’s Indian . So therefore I’d like to place a few more comments on your other post first.

Quote:
But there´s a reason for my constant pessimism: In my post-mortem sessions with players above 2300, I always feel like my opponent is vastly superior

I know exactly what you mean, as I experience that too. I think there are many possible explanations for this. Some people are (unlike me) quite competitive during an analysis and want to impress their opponent. This seems to happen especially when they lost the game, maybe because they want to make up for their defeat or want to regain self-confidence or something. Also, after a 4 hours game I usually don’t feel like calculating a lot of variations during the analysis, so I am more interested in hearing some general ideas or suggestions that I can study at home. So I think that analyses after a game aren’t really valid criterions for player strength.

Quote:
Part of my explanation is also, that the trend is going to reverse at any moment ...

That’s no explanation . Well, I only hope it won’t turn into a self-fulfilling prophecy. Lately I discovered that my personal chess achievements seem to be proportional to my self-esteem (hence why I also tend to make mistakes against stronger opponents, probably). Good mental preparation can easily make a difference of 150 ELO points, I think, although this assumption is somewhat arbitrary. Anyway, this Thursday I am allowed to play a simultaneous exhibition against all chess gurus on my club, so I’m planning a very thorough mental preparation .

Quote:
You are right that Nf3-h4 and f2-f4-f5 would be desirable for white, but black is able to put alot of pressure on white´s centre.

That makes sense and with computer help it is hard for me to see progress for white as well. I already figured there had to be some good reason for a 2600+ player to follow an other plan.

Quote:
Good idea, but it seems to be that 22.…Rhc8 is stronger, to meet 23.Bxc4 with 23.…Kd7.

I think you’re right as in this line white’s pieces will employ a lot less activity.

Quote:
I often find it difficult in my annotations to find a balance between striving for objective assessments, and regarding the fact that in human chess, these assessments are often not very relevant.

Yes, that is exactly what I meant with that these computer variations are a bit ‘unreal’. This is especially true considering the time pressure both of you had to endure.

Quote:
Thank you . It was a very pleasant experience, and it´s beginning to dawn on me that my chess style may be not as boring and dispassionate as I always thought. (I´ve had that reputation for many years.)

Well, from what I see thus far I’d say your style is far from boring. The accelerated dragon, the modern benoni, the Furman variation to avoid a trade of queens, a dubious gambit in the open Catalan…these openings do not sound very dull to me .

That King’s Indian isn’t dull either. I’ll continue working on my analysis of that game.
____________

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Wolfman
Wolfman


Responsible
Supreme Hero
Insomniac
posted August 31, 2004 01:55 PM

This is another game, so it belongs in this forum now. Carry on...
____________

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Wub
Wub


Responsible
Famous Hero
posted September 14, 2004 03:36 AM
Edited By: Wub on 13 Sep 2004

Hello Lews,

Well, here you finally have my analysis of your game against Miso Cebalo. Since the midgame of the King’s Indian is so firmly ‘held hostage’ by such extensive and complicated opening theory, it is quite difficult for someone who doesn’t have this opening in his repertoire to give a sane analysis. On the other hand, your very detailed explanations were quite helpful to me and I feel sufficiently confident to place this opening in my own repertoire too (games that start with 1.e4 g6 can easily transpose after all).

Quote:
My round 6 opponent played the very rare move 9... h6 here. The idea is to transfer the e7-knight via g6 to f4.

Recognizing this motive from the Rossolimo attack, I too thought this was the plan for black. But now I’m not so sure anymore, as the manoeuvre seems too slow to work out and black needs to play for the f5 breakthrough anyway. In the database I noticed that Cebalo happened to have played a game against this 9. …h6 system too, but here black continued with a quick c5, closing the position. Now the Ne7-g6-f4 manoeuvre seems more justified. I noticed that h6 has also been tried to move the knight to g6 via h7, but that doesn’t seem too convincing.

Your opponent’s strategy in the cited game seemed not that coherent to me, though (but that may well be me). His 10… Ne8 looked like an error to me as in my opinion 10… Nd7 was needed to slow down white’s queenside play. Also 9. …h6 appeared nothing more than a loss of tempo, since black continued with h5 later in the game and neither the vacation of the h7 square was used, nor did the knight land on f4.

Quote:
13. a4
Well, alot can be said about the subtleties of this 9.Ne1 new mainline.


I noticed that another point of this move is that the white rook can be lifted to the third rank to assist in the defense, for example by intervening at h3 after a g4 breakthrough.

Quote:
In a game between the two strong grandmasters Nielsen-Kotronias, white played a similar setup to what I did in the game, but without an immediate b2-b4. This saves two moves, but on the other hand enables black to keep hold of a5.

I have been puzzled for quite a while why in this game black does not need to play axb4, but why in your game 15. …axb4 was a necessity. I believe the reason lies in the placement of white’s dark bishop. I think this is white’s most important light piece to assist in the queenside attack, as it can attack the pawns that are fixed on black squares, while it is not impeded by white’s pawns. Had it still somehow been on the g1-a7 diagonal after 23. …Nh6 in Nielsen-Kotronias, then white could have invaded by means of Rc6 + Bb6. Now Nielsen comes up with a nice tactical trick to get the bishop into play again, but his attack strikes just too late. In your game, after 15. b4, the bishop is still placed a lot more active, which I believe is why black cannot allow 16 bxa5 + c5.

Quote:
I remembered that the recommendation from NIC yearbook 69 is to withdraw the knight back to d3, and keep the other knight on c3 as long as possible. So that's what I did. Unfortunately I don't have that yearbook myself - it would be interesting to see whether it suggests an improvement on my play

I don’t have it either and even though I checked every corner of the internet, I can’t find what this possible improvement would be either. Matamoros, who wrote about this line in that yearbook, has only one game in the database that looks familiar, but there white plays the 16. Nb5 line (still an interesting game though). I’ll keep my eyes open for that book, but meanwhile I guess we should look at an improvement on our own.

I noticed that from the 26 other games that feature the position after 16. …Nf6, not a single one continues with 17.Be1. That made me wonder a bit about an improvement too. I think one of the reasons why 17. Nc6 is more popular (I don’t mean to say necessarily better) is that it appears somewhat counterintuitive to have time for the manoeuvre Nd3-Nb4-Nd3 in such a sharp opening as the King’s Indian. But I can think of a more specific reason why Be1 is unusual.

Quote:
Without a bishop on the e1-a5 diagonal, there's no a4-a5.

I’m not so sure about this. You could play a5 and afterwards pick up the pawn with Be1. The advantage of this is that you are using a more flexible move order: Be1 is a very committal move (see Nielsen-Kotronias). The disadvantage is that after a5 bxa5 Be1, black can play a4, so that after Rxa4 Rxa4 Qxa4, the queen is deflected from defending g4, which makes a breakthrough at easier. This happened in a very recent game Grigore-Nevednichy, which I suggest you take a look at if you haven’t done so already. After 20 moves, a similar position as your game was reached there, the only difference being that black did not play Rf7-g7 but Ne7-g6.

Now 17. Nd3 seems more flexible, also because the bishop is a lot more active on the a7-g1 diagonal than on the e1-a5 diagonal. Therefore I don’t see why one would be so eager to play Be1 right away. Of course there is still the question if in the end this different move order actually matters.

Quote:
17. Nd3 Rf7, and as 18. Nb5?! runs into 18... g4, I don't see any way to avoid transposing into the game.

I don’t understand why 18…g4 is so detrimental for white. Granted, white must watch his e4 pawn, but I think black’s pieces are too passive yet to execute a decisive attack. White on the other hand is on the verge of playing a5.

Quote:
c6!?
The normal continuation would have been 21... Ng6


At first I thought this move was rather unnatural and weakening, but the more I looked at it, the more I got the idea that this move may even deserve a ‘!’. After 22. dxc6 Nxc6, a4-a5 is stopped and white needs to rearrange his pieces. Now your plan to exert pressure on d6 seems the most logical, but I believe in the end it may be too time consuming. My idea for black is to play 24. …g4 here, since (among other reasons) the defending bishop on e1 is moved away. Now I can sum up some lines that the computer gives, but there are a lot bizarre computer moves that no human would play. To give you an example:

24. …g4 25. hxg4 hxg4 26. fxg4 Qd7 27. Qd3 Rg6 28. Rb1 Rc8 29. Na3 Qh7 30. Rd2 Be7 31. Qc2 and I could go on for a while, but the computer claims a small advantage for black. The reason why I think that 24. …g4 deserves attention is because of the following less ‘far-fetched’ lines:

24. …g4 25. hxg4 hxg4 26. Nxg4 Nxg4 27. fxg4 Rh7 28. Be1 Qf6 29. Ra3 Qh8 30. Rh3 Rxh3 31. gxh3 Qxh3 32. Rf2 (32. Nc7? Ra7). Also:
24. …g4 25. hxg4 hxg4 26. fxg4 Qd7 27. Rd2 Nxg4 28. Bxg4 Bxg4 29. Nxg4 Qxg4 30. Rxg4, where black has won his pawn back and left white with weak, isolated pawns. As you understand it is extremely difficult to give a rounded-off analysis of 24. …g4, but seen from a human perspective I feel this move is black’s best shot to try and get some advantage.

Quote:
Cebalo decided to sacrifice the d6 pawn in order to exert pressure on the a7-g1 diagonal. This is a very nice idea, but probably too time-consuming to work out well. It was the right moment to play 28... bxa5! Instead

On this analysis you are, again, right. I believe this was another possibility for black to improve. My computer analysis differs a bit from yours here and there, but overall the point stands that 28. …bxa5 would be an improvement. After the critical line with 29. c5 I could not come to a clear conclusion either, though black’s pieces seem slightly more active.

I found the position after 33. Bf3 very interesting to study. At first sight it looks like an incredible mess, but then you notice that almost every piece is either bound or binding other pieces. The candidate moves are actually very limited. I thought that was quite special.

Quote:
34. Rb1 b5 looks very dangerous for a the white (human) player

Yes, I think your 34. Be2 is far superior, not only because you offer to trade your bad for his good bishop, but also because (aside from his kingside threats) after 34. Rb1 b5 black has freed itself from the nasty tension on his b-pawn while the passed a-pawn is not that dangerous.

Quote:
After 39. Bxe5 Bc4 40. Bxf4 Ra2 41. Rc1 Bxf2+ 42. Kh2 Be6 +/=, white has two extra pawns, but I'm doubtful that they are sufficient for a win

Both 38. Bxe5 and 38. Nh6+ seem to lead to largely forced variations, though the latter is no doubt preferable. I think white actually has a won position here:
43. g5
43. …Nh5 44. Be8!
_____44. …Nxf4 45. Rc7+ Kh8 46. g6 Bg8 47. g7+ Kh7 48. Nxg8 Bg1+ 49. Kh1 Bd4 50. Nh6 Bxg7 51. Nf5 ++-
_____44. …Bg1+ 45. Kh1! and transposes to the above line.
43. …Ng4+ 44. Nxg4 Bxg4 45. Bd5 Ra3 46. Rc7+ and wins.
43. …Ng8 44. Be8 and wins.

If these variations are correct, I hope you don’t experience too much of an “if only I had played…” feeling, because overall I think you played a very good game. Considering the often unclear situations, your play survived your and my computer analyses pretty well. Still this was one of the most difficult games to annotate, but nevertheless quite instructive for me .

Last week I played an OTB game that started with the moves 1. Nf3 c5 2. d4 cxd4 3. Nxd4 (apparently this is called the Benoni-Torre) and here I continued with 3. …Nc6 similar to the very first game you posted in this thread. Upon analysis I noticed that black has a better continuation that avoids any Maroczy bind structures leading to a +/= position altogether. I believe that with 3. …d5 white can immediately occupy and take control of the centre.  After the possible continuation 4. c4 e5 5. Nf3 d4 black has a very comfortable position and the upper hand in the middlegame.

I thought you might want to consider this line for your repertory. Thanks again for posting your game!
____________

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Jump To: « Prev Thread . . . Next Thread » This thread is 11 pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 · «PREV / NEXT»
Post New Poll    Post New Topic    Post New Reply

Page compiled in 0.2293 seconds