< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
|Mar-01-08|| ||johnlspouge: Saturday (Very Difficult): White to move and win
Material: N for B. The Black Qe4 has one legal move, to g4. The Black Re7 and Ba6 are both unprotected, and the White Qc6 is pressing Black's Q-side. Both sides need to improve their exceptionally poor piece coordination. The salient feature of the position, however, is the White Rf6, which at first glance is playing Don Quixote, tilting at Black K-side, supported only by Sancho Panza and a mule, the Pe5 and Pg5.
Candidates (30.): Rf4, Rg1, c4, g6
[31...Rxf7 32.gxf7+ Kxf7 [else, 33.Qxe6] 33.Ng5+, winning the Qe4].
32.gxh7+ Qxh7 33.Rg1,
and White has a raging attack with a P up.
Black cannot play 30...fxg6 or 30...hxg6, which block the Qe4's escape square on 31.Rf4. Acceptance of the Rf6 sacrifice loses:
30...gxf6 31.exf6 (threatening 32.fxe7 and e8=Q, winning 2Rs for Rf6)
31...Re8 32.gxf7+, and the threatened fork 33.Ng5 wins 2Rs for Rf6 again.
Black must therefore refuse the Rf6 sacrifice.
30...Rf8 31.Rxf7 (threatening 32.Rxf8+ Kxf8 33.Qa8+ Kf7 [or Re8] 34.Qxa6)
In the threat, White takes Rf8, not Re7, so that Black cannot counterattack along the f-file.
31...Rfxf7 32.gxf7+ Rxf7 (to maintain the counterattack along the f-file)
33.Qe8+, and the threat of
34.Qxf7+ Kxf7 35.Ng5+ and 36.Nxe4
leaves a placid position, with White an exchange up against a bad B.
Time to peek. Timman's solution was much more elegant, and I should have explored the vulnerability of the Black Qe4 more than I did. No doubt the variation forcing Geller's 31...fxg6 has been much discussed. Time to check the kibitzing.
Fascinating. Although I took a little longer calculating than Geller (probably :), I also "panicked" with 30...Rf8. Although I overlooked <MAJ>'s 30.h6 as an alternative refusal of the sacrifice Rf6, it is completely logical: it eliminates all tactical strokes based on the fork Ng5+. Likewise <MAJ>'s 31...Rd7 after accepting the sacrifice Rf6 looks as though it just throws a R, whereas it avoids a later fork Ng5+ after 32.gxf7+ in one of my lines.
<<MostlyAverageJoe> wrote: ...CG unleashed it as a puzzle to confuse everybody. I claim bogus...>
I guess we pieces of wetware just do not compete with <MAJ>'s hardware. His computer analysis looks fine (of course). Personally, I like the idea of an occasional "bogus" puzzle. I am not proud, I like having to be on my toes, and the closer the puzzles are to game situations, the more realistic everyone's answers have to be.
Occasional bogus puzzles also remove the need for <MAJ>'s unlabeled dual puzzles (one real, one bogus). CG is just taking your suggestion, <MAJ>, just spreading the bogus puzzles out over a longer time ;>)
|Mar-01-08|| ||DarthStapler: I got the first move|
|Mar-01-08|| ||Zygote: < DarthStapler: I got the first move> is the sort of comment that is totally pointless.......|
|Mar-01-08|| ||wals: Noting think = There are liars, damned liars, and statistician or words to that effect.
Look at board
White has more territory, value of pawns and pieces is equal,the Nf3 is preventing a + on h4
Rf6 is ready to fall.
30.Rg1 ...Kh8 31.Rxf7 ...Rxf7 32..Qxe6 ...Rf8 still cannot get at the king
30.Rg1 ...g7xf6 31g5xf6+ ...Kh8 32.f6xe7
go for Rg1
look at board
Watto came a gutser there old pal.
|Mar-01-08|| ||johnlspouge: <<kevin86 wrote>: I do not see what becomes of black after: 31...Qxg6.> |
<<sombreronegro> wrote: I think 31...Qxg6 is playable.>
Definitely not. See <Ron>'s post, the first one on the game.
<<Samagonka> wrote: Any better chance for Black winning, had he captured the Rook with 30.gxf6?>
<MostlyAverageJoe>'s first post shows that with best play, White still has some pull after 30...gxf6. I give several lines after 30...gxf6, leaving the strong impression that accepting the sacrifice loses for Black. Geller (and I) missed 31...Rd7 in <MostlyAverageJoe>'s line 2, "panicking" and rejecting 30...gxf6 for 30...Rf8, because Geller (and I) also missed <MostlyAverageJoe>'s line 1 30...h6. So, the answer is "No".
<<JG27Pyth> wrote: Is that an type of "interference">
I was not sure, so I checked. CG's scripts do not permit me to give the correct link, but you can find (with <CTRL>-F) the correct link on this page
by searching for the word "chess".
Apparently, today's puzzle is not an example of interference, where capture of an enemy piece breaks a line of protection. I do not know the term for today's removal of an escape square, so if anyone knows, please enlighten <JG27Pyth> and me.
|Mar-01-08|| ||mworld: <dzechiel: <mworld: dzechiel: from the part I quoted from you above, if 30...hxg6/fxg6 why is 31.Rf5 a good response? to me it just seems like it hangs that rook to either blacks e pawn, f/h pawn depending on which is used to capture the g6 pawn, or to blacks queen? what am i missing ?!?!? :(>
I meant 31 Rf4 to win the queen. Sorry for the typo. I think I made it more than once.
ahah! that was it. thank you for the response and analysis.
|Mar-01-08|| ||MostlyAverageJoe: <johnlspouge: ... <MostlyAverageJoe>'s line 1 30...h6>|
Actually, <RandomVisitor> was the first one to post that line (and 30...gxf6 as well). While his Rybka's and my Hiarcs' lines differ somewhat, it is fairly clear that white's win is far from obvious.
<Occasional bogus puzzles also remove the need for <MAJ>'s unlabeled dual puzzles (one real, one bogus). CG is just taking your suggestion, <MAJ>, just spreading the bogus puzzles out over a longer time.>
The occasional spoiler puzzles are normal (see Daily Puzzle F.A.Q., at the end of the "What kind of move am I looking for?" section), but too infrequent, IMHO.
|Mar-01-08|| ||johnlspouge: <<MostlyAverageJoe> wrote: <johnlspouge: ... <MostlyAverageJoe>'s line 1> Actually, <RandomVisitor> was the first one to post that line (and 30...gxf6 as well). While his Rybka's and my Hiarcs' lines differ somewhat, it is fairly clear that white's win is far from obvious.>|
Thanks, <MAJ>, I missed <RandomVisitor>'s post. I agree, White seems to have pull, but not a won game, in both lines, accepting or rejecting the sacrifice Rf6. It's interesting that humans (i.e., Geller and all of us posting today) overlooked both drawing lines.
<<MostlyAverageJoe> wrote: The occasional spoiler puzzles are normal (see Daily Puzzle F.A.Q., at the end of the "What kind of move am I looking for?" section), but too infrequent, IMHO.>
Today was not really a spoiler by the CG definition. In their FAQ on the POTD, CG defines a "spoiler" as a puzzle position with a tempting unsound sacrifice. The sacrifice in today's puzzle, while tempting, was not unsound - just a dud - and only the hardware caught on. It really was the "drawn position" you want as a dual to the POTD. I agree, however, that duals are not frequent enough to encourage anyone to deeper analysis.
|Mar-01-08|| ||JG27Pyth: <Johnlspouge: removal of an escape square> |
Yes, that's the concept I was trying to put into words -- I think perhaps this is sometimes called, informally at least, 'suffocation' -- as it turns out though, in this puzzle the escape square isn't really removed anyway.
|Mar-01-08|| ||eternaloptimist: I don't know if I would classify this as very difficult, but it was a pretty good combination. I looked @ 30.♙g6; I just didn't know what Geller played after that (30....♖f8??). If: <RandomVisitor: 30...h6 or 30...gxf6> would have been played this combo wouldn't have worked. Although, Timman would rank near the top in the brilliant combo department. Timman is one of favorite players of all time, & he is definitely one of the best players of all time. If it weren't for a guy named Karpov, he would have been world champion.|
|Mar-01-08|| ||johnlspouge: <JG27Pyth>, I found a useful chess dictionary http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess_... in Wikipedia. It has "interference" but not "suffocation". I am always interested in words, so if you discover any interesting technical chess terms, please let me know.|
|Mar-01-08|| ||012: Friday puzzle, Feb-29-08. <31. ?> A Colovic vs W Arencibia, 2004|
|Mar-01-08|| ||xfer: What happens after 30.Rg1?|
|Mar-01-08|| ||johnlspouge: <<xfer> wrote: What happens after 30.Rg1?> |
Toga II 1.31. gives
[ply 15/44, time 01:04, value -0.49]
30.Rg1 Bc4 31.Qa4 c6 32.Rf4 Qg6 33.Rg2 Ra7 34.Kg1 b5 35.Qa3 b4 36.Qa4 Bb5 37.Qb3 Qh5
[ply 15/64, time 03:03, value +0.86]
30.g6 gxf6 31.exf6 Rd7 32.gxh7+ Qxh7 33.Qxd7 Kh8 34.h4 Qg6 35.Ng5 Qxf6+ 36.Kg3 Rg8 37.Qxc7 Be2 38.Qf4 Kg7 39.Kf2 Qxf4+ 40.exf4 Bh5 41.Rg1 Bg6 42.Nf3
Note that the ends of the lines become inaccurate. The valuation shows that 30.Rg1 is worth about 1.35 P less than 30.g6.
Note that Toga is freeware. My chessforum contains instructions for downloading everything you need to do your own analysis.
|Mar-01-08|| ||znprdx: <JG27Pyth:> wow uncanny your post almost word for word was my experience and assessment...I just lost patience since there was little dynamic about the position.|
|Mar-07-08|| ||avidfan: Funny to see the Black queen oscillate from g6 to e4 while White calculates the moves to trap her with the rook.|
30.g6 is a wonderful move which threatens to ruin the Black position.
30...hxg6 loses to 31.Rf4 when the queen is trapped while 30...fxg6 ruins the pawn structure by leaving e6 undefended.
From the text, Black still loses the queen if 31...Qxg6 32.Rg1 Qh5 32.Rh4 Qf5 33.Rg5 .
|Aug-29-11|| ||DrMAL: A famous Torre Attack win. I play this opening now and then and am always happy if my opponent plays 3...e6 blocking in their LS bishop. After 6...b6 black's position is very passive and after 12...Nc6 preventing c5 it is even more so.|
I don't like the plans Timman adopted but eventually his persistence paid off. After 29.Rf6 instead of 29...Qh5 to maintain equality black played 29...Qe4?! and then after 30.g6 black blundered with 30...Rf8? (instead of 30...h6) trapping his own queen. Simply 34.Kg1 wins but 34.c4?! sufficed anyway.
|Aug-29-11|| ||SimonWebbsTiger: @<DrMal>
are you an old man who smokes cigars? It's a little saying we have over here in Denmark, which I believe originates from Bent Larsen. The London, Torre, Veresov and Colle/Zukertort systems have a certain degree of popularity at club level here and there is more than a little truth that the older generation play it a lot. (They are decent enough lines, of course, as Kovacevic and Jussupow have shown countless times.) Only the youngsters play the Trompowsky!
I have never really liked the positions with ...d7-d5 in these lines, not that it is bad for black or else no-one would play the Queen's gambit. There is just a certain rigidity to black's structure I can't stand. Two sterling, classic examples of the approach I like are:
Colle vs Capablanca, 1929
Ahues vs Alekhine, 1930
|Aug-29-11|| ||DrMAL: <SWT> Well, compared to many on here (as is evident by level of maturity in their posts) I am probably a old geezer LOL...sorry, no cigar; don't drink, smoke nor chew (cud included). I would not compare the Torre Attack with those you mention but I would compare it with the Tromp of course. The Tromp is not only for youngsters, a certain GM named Hodgson got rather famous for his huge success with that opening, it's imbalance is of fundamental significance. Personally, those two (Tromp and Torre) are the only Queen Pawn openings (non-c4) I ever play (and rarely at that). And I personally think 3.e3 is inferior (as its stats also show) but it is always a matter of taste, if you feel most comfortable with them by all means play them, have a cigar! Cheers.|
|Aug-29-11|| ||SimonWebbsTiger: @<DrMal>
oh heck, I don't play the old cigar smoker lines in the Queen Pawn -- I face them as black.
Another one from Larsen; if one plays the Caro-Kann now, what will one play when old? Which didn't stop him popularising, with Bronstein, the ...gxf6 line in the CK!
|Aug-29-11|| ||perfidious: <Simon> I was playing the Bronstein-Larsen line 5....gxf6 in my twenties.|
Now I'm past fifty-what to do if I play again?
|Aug-29-11|| ||DrMAL: <SWT> That makes sense now, sorry for being obtuse about what side you were playing. IDK, it seems that many in the UK (e.g., http://www.kenilworthchessclub.org/...) fancy QP openings such as the Barry Attack here. It also seems that a bit of prudence and a timely c5 tends to crush them one way or another. Maybe Larsen had a hankering for smoke filled English pubs too, he had lots of humor indicating his familiarity with that sort of tweed garbed chap. Cheerio! LOL|
|Aug-25-12|| ||Vitinho: I don't understand why timman plays Qc3-Qc6.Is to avoid c5 ?Why not Qd2 ? 17.Qd2 18.g4 18... pxp 19.pxp Rc8 20.c3 Qg6 21. Rd1 ( to avoid exchange queens)Bc4 22.a3 b5 white should plays here Kf2 ,h4 and Rh1 or Rg1.Is too dangerous for black.But i like it.|
|Mar-25-13|| ||wachter123680: Timman could have closed in about 25 moves if he developed like Kasparov in the game Kasparov vs B Kantsler, 1975
..with a little more aggressive action in the knights and rook.|
|Mar-25-13|| ||wachter123680: I think even Geller with rook f7 may have had a chance, I'd not have resigned too easily|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·