< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Jun-19-03|| ||drukenknight: chesslab gives Sneaky line as: 19. exd5 Bc5+ 20. Kh2 Rxe1 21. Qxh7+ Kf8 22. Qh8+ Ke7 23. Qh4+ Kf8 24. Qxe1 cxd5 25. Bd2 Qd6 26. Qe5 |
with a -0.16 score for exd5 which means: favors black very slightly.
Hmm, I think my next book will be "How I learned to stop worrying and LOVE the computer."
|Jun-19-03|| ||crafty: 18. ... d5 19. exd5 ♗c5+ 20. ♔h2 ♕h4 21. ♖xe8+ ♖xe8 22. ♗d2 = (eval -0.05; depth 13 ply; 250M nodes)|
|Jun-19-03|| ||drukenknight: Okay so tell me again what the negative socre means.
It is very confusing, on the chesslab computer the score is associated with whoever's move it is. If it plays a black move, a negative score means favors white.
In other programs, negative always means it favors black.
SO what is it here?
So Sneaky, what do you say? we play this out using our metal monsters in a deep version of GOdchess?
Or we sit down like men and play it face to face at some arranged time?
|Jun-19-03|| ||Sneaky: Click on crafty's name, it explains everything.
In any case, the computers seem to think that it's about level. (Unless they show a score 1.00 I don't think they offer much advice.)
Most players wouldn't want to be subjected to Qxh7+ so I can see why Keres opted for 18...g6.
|Jun-19-03|| ||Sylvester: I just did, that helped a lot. Thanks. Do you know how they decide when to use it? |
|Jun-19-03|| ||Shadout Mapes: -0.05 means black is ahead by 5 hundredths of a pawn, so it's basically equal (the advantage is too miniscule to even count). |
|Jun-20-03|| ||drukenknight: Only 5 hudredths? I tell you there is no way to measure the amount of courage in my d-pawn. |
|May-29-05|| ||notyetagm: Amazing to see a game at this level end in a forced <Lolli mate>: 32 ... ♕c2? 33 ♕h6! ♕xb1+ 34 ♔h2 ♖g8 35 ♕xh7+! ♔xh7 36 ♖h4#.|
|May-29-05|| ||notyetagm: <AussiePatzer: Yep, a better move order than the obvious 32. Qh6 Rg8 33. Rf4 g5. Nice puzzle.>|
Yes, nice move order by Bronstein: play the rook lift first (32 ♖f4), keeping the Black g6-pawn firmly blockaded by the White g5-queen, <then> play the queen into the h6-hole (33 ♕h6!) since Black can no longer defend against the Lolli mate threat by playing ... g6-g5.
|Jul-28-05|| ||keypusher: <Resignation Trap>, does Botvinnik comment on this game in his notorious notebook?|
|Jul-28-05|| ||Gypsy: <I could have gone in straight away for 30.Rf4 bxa2 31.Qh6 axb1Q+ 32.Kh2, but wining this game ment too much to me, so I tried to play it as safely as possible.> D. Bronstein, '200 Open Games'.|
<...On the eve of my game against Keres I was half a point behind the leader, but Boleslavsky drew quickly with Stahlberg in the last round, thus kindly presenting me with the chance of catching him up. This I succeded in doing. ...
...The gambit variation with the sacrifice of the important central pawn is, in my view, quite correct: White gets a mobile pair of pawns e and f. Our game in some measure confirmed this view. The game was fairly even for a long time, but Keres had to only underestimate the strengh of 29.Qg5 and things suddenly deteriorated for his king. ...>
|Jul-28-05|| ||Resignation Trap: Botvinnik's comment in his red notebook: "Spanish. In the opening 'Br' sacrificed a pawn for the two bishops and active play. Schemed artistically, but hung by a thread. Gained the advantage, but in time trouble went wrong. Could have gained a great advantage, but played such that he could barely save the game. But after the very first mistake he very accurately gave mate. An incomplete, but very good (in the style of Belavenets!) game!"|
See also: Sergey Vesevolodovich Belavenets .
|Jul-28-05|| ||keypusher: Thanks, <RT>, definitely one of Botvinnik's more intriguing comments about Brontstein's games!|
|Jul-29-05|| ||Gypsy: Any sillicon jockey interested in running and reporting a Fritz or Junior profile of this game? (Thx if you do!)|
|Jul-29-05|| ||sitzkrieg: Here it is ( i was a little dumb and put it in Dutch language; D=Q T=R and P=N )
Hope it can be understood:P
[Fritz 5.32 (5s)]
1.e4 C91: Closed R Lopez 1...e5 2.Pf3 Pc6 3.Lb5 a6 4.La4 Pf6 5.0-0 Le7 6.Te1 b5 7.Lb3 0-0 8.d4 d6 9.c3 Lg4 10.h3 Lxf3 11.Dxf3 exd4 12.Dd1 dxc3 13.Pxc3 Pa5 14.Lc2 Te8 15.f4 b4 16.Pd5 Pxd5 17.Dxd5 c6 18.Dd3 g6 19.Kh1 Lf8 20.Tf1 prepares f5. 20...Lg7 21.Ld2 Out of Book 21...c5 [21...d5 22.exd5 cxd5 23.f5µ] 22.La4 Tf8 23.Tab1 Db6 24.f5 Gaining space. 24...Ld4 25.Dg3 Pc4 26.Lh6 Lg7 [Better then 26...Lxb2 27.fxg6 hxg6 A) ‹28.Lxf8 Txf8 (28...Kxf8?? 29.Dxg6 Dc7 30.Txb2 ) 29.Lb3 Le5 ; B) 28.Lb3 ] 27.Lxg7 [27.Dh4 Kh8²] 27...Kxg7 28.f6+ Kh8 29.Dg5 b3?? [¹29...Tfc8!?= ] 30.axb3 [¹30.Tf4 seems even better.] 30...d5 (30...bxa2?? 31.Dh6 axb1D+ 32.Kh2 Dg1+ 33.Kxg1 Tg8 34.Th4 Dxb2 35.Dxh7#) 31.Th4 bxa2 ] 30...Db4?? [¹30...Da5±] 31.bxc4 Dxa4 [31...Tg8 32.Tf4 Dd2 ] 32.Tf4 Dc2 [32...Tg8 Was a last try.] 33.Th4 Tg7 (33...Dxc4?? 34.Txh7+ Kxh7 35.Dh4#) 34.fxg7+ Kxg7 35.Dh6+ Kf6 36.Tf1+ Ke6 ] 33.Dh6 1-0
|Jul-29-05|| ||sitzkrieg: Really looks incomprehensible..|
|Jul-29-05|| ||percyblakeney: <Gypsy> I finally managed to write this post correctly, I think... :-) This is what Shredder 9 says, 30 seconds per move. I bought it today, and it doesn't use the "normal" system with - as always meaning black advantage, but evaluates every position from the side whose move it is, which is a bit confusing in the beginning:|
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. O-O Be7 6. Re1 b5 7. Bb3 O-O 8. d4 d6 9. c3 Bg4 10. h3 Bxf3 11. Qxf3 exd4 12. Qd1 dxc3 13. Nxc3 Na5 14. Bc2 Re8 15. f4 b4 16. Nd5 Nxd5 17. Qxd5 c6 18. Qd3 g6 19. Kh1 Bf8 20. Rf1 Bg7 21. Bd2 c5 +0.47/16 19s (21... d5 +1.08/16 1:11m 22. e5 c5 23. Ba4 Re6 24. b3 d4 25. Qf3 Re7 26. Rac1 Rc8) 22. Ba4 Rf8 23. Rab1 Qb6 -0.16/15 0s (23... Qf6 +0.65/15 29s 24. f5 Qd4 25. Qxd4 Bxd4 26. Bh6 Rfd8 27. Kh2 d5) 24. f5 Bd4 25. Qg3 Nc4 26. Bh6 Bg7 -1.52/15 2s (26... Nxb2 -0.11/15 32s 27. fxg6 hxg6 28. Bb3 c4 29. Rxb2 Be5 30. Qg5 cxb3) 27. Bxg7 Kxg7 28. f6+ Kh8 29. Qg5 b3 -11.02/15 0s (29... Rfb8 -0.12/15 38s 30. Qh6 Rg8 31. Bd7 Qd8 32. Bc6 Rb8 33. Bd5 Ne5) 30. axb3 +5.41/16 1:02m (30. Rf4 +11.02/16 24s Qd8) 30... Qb4 31. bxc4 Qxa4 -23.17/16 0s (31... Rab8 -5.79/16 49s 32. Bc6 Rbd8) 32. Rf4 Qc2 -M5/17 0s (32... Rg8 -22.93/17 0s 33. Rh4 Rg7 34. fxg7+ Kxg7 35. Qh6+ Kg8) 33. Qh6 1-0
|Jul-29-05|| ||Gypsy: Thank you < percyblakeney, sitzkrieg >. As far as I parsed the computer evaluations, game was fairly double-edged untill <29...b3??>. Instead 29...Rfb8(c8) whould have forced 30.Qh6 Rg8, as 30.Rf4? Qd8 could have defended the main K-side threats.|
Unclear evaluation is of the <26...Bg7>. One computer warns agains 26...Bxb2 while the other computer thinks that 26...Nxb2 was quite playable instead. (It does look rather wild.)
|Jul-29-05|| ||sitzkrieg: Probably Shredder is right as it is a stronger program and also had more time per move. The difference in evaluation is indeed a sign of the difficultness of this game.|
|Jul-31-05|| ||Averageguy: A great game.|
|Oct-19-05|| ||Averageguy: What I really like about Bronstein is how he wasn't afraid to take unorthodox risks and gambles, even in high pressure and serious situations like the Candidates Tournament.|
|Oct-20-05|| ||Averageguy: This is an interesting gambit, and lokos quite sound. Does anyone think it could be played safely against the closed spanish, instead of the heavy theory 9.h3 ? I might pick it up, does anyone think it could be suitable for a tactical player who plays against 1500-1800 players?|
|Dec-13-05|| ||TheKid: <Averageguy> Strongly recommend it mate, this very game got me into it. It can overcome opponents who aren't prepared, and still work against ones who are.|
|Dec-12-12|| ||GrahamClayton: Bronstein uses the same checkmating pattern as seen in Menchik vs G A Thomas, 1932|
|Mar-04-16|| ||Edeltalent: <I could have gone in straight away for 30.Rf4 bxa2 31.Qh6 axb1Q+ 32.Kh2, but wining this game ment too much to me, so I tried to play it as safely as possible.> D. Bronstein, '200 Open Games'.|
Bronstein describes it somewhat more lofty in the "Sorcerer's apprentice": <With my next move 30.axb3 I show my respect for Paul Keres, because in a position where the simple 30.axb3 Ne5 31.Rf4 is completely sufficient, it would be pretty childish to go for 30.Rf4 bxa2 31.Qh6 axb1D+ 32.Kh2.>
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·