< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
|Jun-12-07|| ||soberknight: It took me two minutes, but I finally got it. I just didn't see e5 because, why would I just chuck the pawn for nothing, but then I saw that the bishop was essentially pinned and could not give check. Cool!|
I'm certain Black really resigned. Against Vlastimil Hort, I would have resigned too. In a simple endgame with many pawns still remaining, a difference of two pawns for a bishop should be decisive.
|Jun-12-07|| ||kevin86: Black thought that he could pull a fast one and trap white into 13 fxg4 ♗xh2+ 14 ♔xh2 ♖xd1 gaining the exchange for black.|
Instead,white throws a monkey wrench into the works by advancing the pawn,blocking the bishop and attacking the same bishop. Black loses a piece after:
13...fxe5 14 fxg4 and the bishop cannot capture at h2
13...♗xe5 14 ♖xd8+ ♔xd8 15 fxg4 and the combination to capture the rook is gone
|Jun-12-07|| ||Crowaholic: Basic observations: Total lack of White queenside development. White is very passive. No White mating attack is even remotely visible. Therefore, the best thing is probably to try and win some material.|
ISTM that after 12. fxg4, Black equalizes with 12. ..Bxh2+ 13. Kxh2 Rxd1 14. Nc3.
What about 12. Rxd6 ?
12. ..cxd6 13. fxg4
seem to win the equivalence of a pawn at the cost of damaging the pawn structure. Not exactly a breathtaking result for White. Worse,
12. ..Rxd6 13. fxg4 Rd1+ means trading R+B for 2B.
What about a defensive move? Maybe this is one of those puzzles where, lacking a good attack, you have to play a good defense. 12. Nc3 or Be2 come to mind. Nc3 seems preferrable since it improves queenside development, too. Yes, Nc3 seems solid. But are there more ambitious responses to Black's threat?
12. e5!? for example. 12. ..fxe5 13. fxg4 is bad for Black. 12. ..Bxe5 13. Rxd8+ Kxd8 14. fxg4 loses material, too. So do 12. ..Be7, ..Bf8 and moves of the light-squared bishop. 12. ..b6 maybe? 13. exd6 still wins a piece. I think this is the right move.
|Jun-12-07|| ||IMDONE4: <prinsallan>, <ahmadov> im confused... why are you discussing and congratulating each other on obviously inferior lines?|
|Jun-12-07|| ||MiCrooks: e5 is the only move. Often there are other lines that are good enough (like a couple of weeks ago when almost any Knight capture gave you at least a piece advantage). But in this case, as your computers have verified for you, other moves give no advantage at all. The end game here is clearly won by White, which is why he resigned. To many pawns left, and your extra pawns not giving you any clear advantage (like an advanced passed pawn or two to give some compensation) mean you have no hope other than that Hort would blunder.|
|Jun-12-07|| ||Kleve: <Gypsy>: Haha! Playable for me... I haven't played Hort anytime recently, and frankly don't expect to.|
But then, my endgame calculation is an abomination, and the win isn't as apparent to me as it is to those of you with greater skill. I'd at least try to force a draw... And I am a big believer in foolish chess optimism. I'd wait for the blunder.
|Jun-12-07|| ||tdubb43: 11... O-O-O was one heck of an adventurous move for Black. Perhaps it would have looked brilliant against a player of a lower rating, but it looks absurd when you realize the blocking potential of the almighty e4 pawn.|
|Jun-12-07|| ||fm avari viraf: My first thought was 12.fxg4 Bxh2+ 13.Kxf2 Rxd1 14.Nc3 & a long battle in the offing. Then, I found the simple move 12.e5 which shuts the Bishop's diagonal & Black has to part with one of his Bishops. Of course, Black can win 2 pawns for a piece but to survive against Hort the chances seems to be bleak.|
|Jun-12-07|| ||Kings Indian: Unfortunately, I entirely missed blacks plan of Bxh2 And Rxd1. Instead I made a foolish effort to mate, and then gave up. Dissapointed.|
|Jun-12-07|| ||micartouse: I found it quickly because I've studied the game before. :) It's possible that ... Bg4 and ... 0-0-0 were thought up beforehand but clearly it wasn't a good idea.|
|Jun-12-07|| ||Crowaholic: <patzer2: 13. Kxh2 Rxd1+> How can the rook give check from d1 to h2? :-)|
|Jun-12-07|| ||patzer2: For today's puzzle solution, the move 12. e5! + - not only defends against the discovered attack threat 12. fxg4? Bxh2+! 13. Kxh2 Rxd8 (needlessly allowing Black counter chances) but also wins a decisive piece (one of the two threatened Bishops) and the game via a winning double attack.|
<Crowaholic> Sorry for the confusion. This is my corrected post.
|Jun-12-07|| ||Fezzik: I don't know, but I think the puzzles are getting a bit harder. This was straight-forward, but it actually required the reader to count the material before finding the best move!|
I took about 30 seconds vs less than 5 seconds this time. For me, that's quite a bit of time for a Tuesday puzzle. Good Job, CG.com!
|Jun-12-07|| ||MaczynskiPratten: Basically, at club level you could play on and hope to get some counterplay. At grandmaster level you wouldn't have a chance. Better to resign and save everyone's energies for the next round. Even if material were level Black would have problems against a positional expert; doubled pawn on c5, isolated pawn on e5, White has strong square/outpost on e4 and possibly c4, d5 etc, Black's bishop is bad and his white squares are weak. White gets his Q side into play quickly with Nc3 and Bg5 and Black has no real compensation for the piece. Sooner or later the extra pawns will come under attack and drop off. The "only 1 point deficit" and "2 pawns for the piece" are mirages.|
|Jun-12-07|| ||Tactic101: A nice throw in move! Hanging by a thread, counting on one desperate resource (fxg4??, Bxh2+!, Kxh2 and RxR), black can hardly be expected to hold together.|
|Jun-12-07|| ||Tactic101: Checked <MAJ>'s analysis. Interesting that white is not losing after fxg4.|
|Jun-12-07|| ||PositionalTactician: hey, why are they giving a puzzle that is theory???|
|Jun-12-07|| ||chessmoron: 10...Bg4 is not theory.|
|Jun-13-07|| ||MostlyAverageJoe: <Honza Cervenka: <MostlyAverageJoe> Such an endgame with extra piece against two Pawns is only a matter of technique to win> Obviously, I am not in a position to dispute that...|
I did not finish my attempt to get the Hiarcs to show me how white wins (I am running it now at 30 minutes per move - maybe next week I'll have it :-) Never mind, I trust Honza and others. I never had any doubts that the engines still need some more IQ to be able to exploit such positions.
It would be nice if one of the high-ELO members of CG could elaborate on the techniques to win such positions.
Honza? LIFE Master AJ? fm avari viraf? Anyone still reading this forum?
|Jun-13-07|| ||Honza Cervenka: <al wazir> Of course, sometimes GMs continue to play in objectively lost position after loss of piece (see Samisch vs Capablanca, 1929 for just one well-known example) and sometimes - like young AAA in Alekhine vs Blackburne, 1914 - they even manage to escape from defeat. But easy win for white would be almost certain outcome here even against much weaker player than Vlasta Hort and so it is quite probable that black (surely disgusted and demoralised by his blunder) did not bother to try it.|
|Jun-13-07|| ||Honza Cervenka: <MostlyAverageJoe> In general the strategy of play with material advantage like in final position here is based on two main principles:|
1) Trade pieces (i.e. simplify the position) if possible and force the weaker side to trade pieces.
2) Don't trade Pawns if it is not necessary or advantageous.
Here is one possible continuation (produced with help of Fritz 8): 12... Bxf3 13. gxf3 fxe5 14. Nc3 Nf6 15. Bg5 Rhf8 16. Ne4 Rd7 17. Bxf6 gxf6 18. Nxd6+ cxd6 19. Nc4 Kc7 20. Ne3 Kc6 21. Rd5 f5 22. Rad1 f4 23. Ng4 Rf5 24. c4 b6 25. Nf2 Rf6 26. Ne4 Rg6+ 27. Kf2 Kc7 28. h4 Rh6 29. a4 Rd8 30. a5 bxa5 31. Nxc5 Ra8 32. Na4 Rg8 33. Rg1 Rxg1 34. Kxg1 Rxh4 35. c5 dxc5 36. Rxc5+ Kd6 37. Rxa5 Rh3 38. Rxa6+ Kd5 39. Nc3+ Kd4 40. Kg2 Rg3+ 41. Kf2 Rh3 42. Ne2+ Kd3 43. Ra3+ Kd2 44. b4 Rh2+ 45. Kf1 Rh1+ 46. Ng1 Rh6 47. Ra7 Rb6 48. Re7 Rb5 49. Rxh7 Rxb4 50. Re7 Rb5 51. Nh3 Rb3 52. Kg2 Rb5 53. Nf2 Kc3 54. Ne4+ Kd4 55. Kh3 Ra5 56. Kg4 Ke3 57. Nd6 Kd3 58. Nf7 Kd4 59. Rd7+ Ke3 60. Rb7 Ra8 61. Rb3+ Kd4 62. Rb4+ Kc3 63. Re4 Rg8+ 64. Ng5 Re8 65. Kf5 Kd2 66. Rxe5 Rf8+ 67. Ke4 Rf6 68. Rf5 Rd6 69. Kxf4 and this already should be resignable even for the most stubborn optimist...:-)
|Jun-14-07|| ||al wazir: <HC>: So, if I understand you, playing (like Fritz 8) at the 2600+ level against an opponent of comparable ability, white could have finished black off in a mere 55 moves or so.|
Hmmm . . .
|Jun-14-07|| ||Sredni Vashtar: <al wazir> It also could mean that a 2200+ player (Jan Cervenka) would finish off a 2600+ player (Fritz), given enough time for 50+ moves.|
I wonder whether my proposed strategy (exchange the isolated pawns, bishops, and rooks. Keep one knight, then use it to pick off the pawns from whichever side the black king is not on) would result in a faster resolution ...
|Jun-19-12|| ||screwdriver: When you play for cheap tricks, you can get burned.|
|Jul-29-16|| ||posoo: now dis - DIS - is a CLASUC EXAMPUL of da theery
DO NOT TRY TO BE TOO CLEVAER
LOOK AT DA MAN
he thinks: "OOO i GOT somfun for dat EENUS BOVEENUS
Flustomel comes BACK wit da PON MOOVE and says U SHODNA been so SHARP?!
why do people play this game it is STUPID?
I hate chesse and i long for da days of my yoof.
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·