< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Apr-18-09|| ||WhiteRook48: drawing with no rook! Stupid!|
|Apr-19-09|| ||number 23 NBer: I just love looking at this kind of game once in a while; it makes all those games when I go down a rook look brighter and full of hope.|
|Apr-19-09|| ||Jim Bartle: You always hear talk about a bad bishop. Here's a bad rook, in fact a worthless rook.|
|Aug-15-09|| ||WhiteRook48: really bad rook
and a bad king
|Oct-10-09|| ||GrahamClayton: The "Oxford Encyclopedia of Chess Games" gives 28.a3 a ?, as Black can fix the White pawns with 28...a4. Would 28.b3 be a better move, giving White the possibility to advance his Q-side pawns?|
|May-30-10|| ||TheaN: <GrahamClayton>
Neither of those evaluations make much sense, both 28.a3 and c5 draw just fine. The fact is that White wants to have his pawns on dark squares vs the light-squared Bishop. After 28....b6, to block 29.c5, 29.b4! draws, allowing c5 and d6 as in the game. Once the Queen side pawns are on dark squares, White only has to move his King from and to g3 and draw.
|Aug-12-10|| ||sevenseaman: Thank you Cervanka, for the Pyrrhic draw.|
|Jul-02-13|| ||King Sacrificer: Reminds Y Gusev vs Averbakh, 1946 with the prisoned king and rook.|
|Jul-02-13|| ||FSR: Petrov's Defense often leads to a draw, but Black is usually not a rook up at the end.|
|Jul-02-13|| ||coconut: It's amazing how far engines have come since the thread's early comments. Stockfish sees the draw in just a few seconds and reaches depths over 50 with a draw score in a few more. It seems like once you rule out Black's stupid options the remaining positions fit comfortably inside a transposition table, which lets engines quickly see the draw in every variation.|
|Jul-02-13|| ||Abdel Irada: Seldom have I seen a kingside so paralyzed. In spite of the rook down, I believe White would be winning here if Black didn't have the passed g-pawn.|
|Jul-02-13|| ||FSR: <Abdel Irada: Seldom have I seen a kingside so paralyzed. In spite of the rook down, I believe White would be winning here if Black didn't have the passed g-pawn.>|
How? White wins the bishop at will, but I don't see a way to avoid stalemate after that. Black will sac his pawns. Indeed, as far as I can see he can preemptively do so by playing ...b5-b4, White takes, and then ...a4-a3, White takes that one too (leaving him with pawns on a3, b4, and d6), and Black shuttles his bishop along the a4-e8 diagonal, captures any pawn that advances, and dares White to take the bishop, which will result in stalemate.
|Jul-02-13|| ||Abdel Irada: <FSR>: That is a difficult line of defense to beat, but a well-timed Bg7 will allow ...h5, and after exchanging on h8 White can force off the bishop and run his b-pawn, which arrives a move ahead of the h-pawn and with check.|
I can't say I've worked out all the variations, so Black may have some resources I've overlooked, but I still believe that White wins in this counterfactual scenario.
|Jul-02-13|| ||Honza Cervenka: <Abdel Irada> <FSR> As <capanegra> pointed out long time ago 24.Rh1!! Bf5 25.Rh5! Bxc2 26.Re5! wins for white as black Bishop and Rook must cover passively threatening mates on the back rank and g-file, white King wins g-Pawn, and then arrives to the Queenside with decisive effect. In final position (i.e. after trade of Rooks) without g-Pawn black is probably able to defend his position successfully due to stalemate trick and inability of lone white King to penetrate into black position, for example 33...Bd7 34.Kf4 b6 and white King has no pass.|
|Jul-02-13|| ||kevin86: Black's imprisoned king and rook can do nothing-the game is a draw!|
|Jul-02-13|| ||Moszkowski012273: Losing move was 17...Be2
Easy win for black with simply 17...Bxe5 18.dxe5,Nf3+ 18.Kf2,f5
|Jul-02-13|| ||Honza Cervenka: <Moszkowski012273: Losing move was 17...Be2
Easy win for black with simply 17...Bxe5 18.dxe5,Nf3+ 18.Kf2,f5>|
Well, I think that your line 17...Bxe5 18.dxe5 Nf3+ 19.Kf2 f5 leads to immediate loss after 20.Be8 dxe4 (what else?) 21.e6 with threat 22.Bf7#.
|Jul-02-13|| ||shishio71: Absolutely incredible in two aspects - how the black king and rook are totally paralyzed and how white could actually win with 24.Rh1! Incredible GOTD|
|Jul-02-13|| ||SugarDom: Since the white rook was hung earlier, the pun should have gone "Hung Drawn and Quartered"...|
|Mar-19-14|| ||Moszkowski012273: I stand corrected!|
|Mar-19-14|| ||perfidious: Just when one thought the <en prison> rule was reserved for the roulette wheel.....|
|Dec-02-14|| ||Amarande: This is also a game that very much serves as a valuable theoretical yardstick - namely, that of the effective value of the King.|
You can't exchange your King for anything, you might say. A game could never measure this. But look at the position: the "extra" Black Rook is hors de combat, certainly. So is the material equal? Not really, since White's Bishop must remain at h6 for all time (otherwise Black would free his Rook, and win). It is not free to participate in greater discourse, and therefore, it might as well be as off the board as the Black Rook, at least once the remaining pieces are exchanged (depriving the Bishop of any potential cohorts for a mate threat).
So White's actually a piece down still then? No, that's not quite it, either - Black's King is as out of play as the White Bishop and Black Rook. In other words, White actually thus has, effectively - a King for a Bishop, and this is the true material measure of the position.
So the game's end position serves, indeed, as that rare tool of theory, that contains an *effectively* nonexistent King on one side, and therefore can actually compare the remaining King to other material as if you could, in fact, have exchanged a King. And it turns out that indeed, as is regularly speculated, that the King does essentially balance a minor piece and is perhaps slightly stronger. Just as the theoreticians had it, but here's the proof!
|Jan-18-15|| ||ralfablanca: I really enjoy reading these King's Gambits.|
|Feb-28-18|| ||centralfiles: <Honza>
<Honza Cervenka: <Moszkowski012273: Losing move was 17...Be2 Easy win for black with simply 17...Bxe5 18.dxe5,Nf3+ 18.Kf2,f5>
Well, I think that your line 17...Bxe5 18.dxe5 Nf3+ 19.Kf2 f5 leads to immediate loss after 20.Be8 dxe4 (what else?) 21.e6 with threat 22.Bf7#.>
|Jun-03-18|| ||centralfiles: <Honza> looked at this again, You are correct.|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·