< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Oct-05-03|| ||justy: Drukenknight, you said:
"..In this case position means 00. Black will be unable to 00 or 000. That will be a permanent advantage for white if he can prevent 00.
You can call it position, you can call it development, call it king safety.
Whatever, it's something white will have that black does not.
Does it win the game? Yes. WHy? Because the game is already won! WHite has the move and he has material. Duh."
Don't you think the open g-line offers black some opportunities of attacking whites king after castling, and that could be the reason why white doesn't castle?
|Oct-06-03|| ||Honza Cervenka: If 21...Qd6!?, then 22.Nxh7+ Rxh7 23.Qxd6 Bxd6 24.Rxh7 |
|Mar-19-06|| ||Morphy86: Hello all,
sorry for the stupid question (I'm quite a beginner), but it seems to me that Black has abandoned a bit too quickly... He doesn't seem to have a completely lost position! Sure, the 2 pawns difference is a bit annoying, yet... something maybe can still be done...... but maybe it's only my "fight to the end" mentality!!!! Thanks!!
|Mar-23-06|| ||Dres1: DK, you keep saying that on the 11th move black has a material advantage, but thats not correct.|
|Jul-16-06|| ||ganstaman: <Dres1> First, realize that DK's comments were made in 2002. He may read this, but there's not way to guarantee that.|
Secondly, I think I read in another game some member (I believe it was DK) claim that when counting material, doubled pawns only count as 1 pawn. He even added the comment "it works every time."
Of course, though, this is ridiculous. When counting material, you count all your material. What you then have to do is consider the position itself. I don't know why you'd make a decision just based on material count anyway -- you'd be dumb not to consider what the material is doing and what its potential is. If someone has a bad bishop vs a good bishop, we don't discount either bishop in the material count. However, we give the good bishop an advantage because the position affords it this advantage.
So in this game, material is equal on move 11. The doubled pawns don't even look that weak (doubled pawns come in many forms). Black should avoid going straight to the endgame without getting some sort of other advantage, but he shouldn't count one of his f-pawns as completely missing either.
|Jul-16-06|| ||keypusher: <Secondly, I think I read in another game some member (I believe it was DK) claim that when counting material, doubled pawns only count as 1 pawn. He even added the comment "it works every time.">|
I think drukenknight later decided he had been mistaken about this.
|Jul-17-06|| ||whatthefat: I'm not even sure I've ever seen any correct analysis from <drukenknight>.|
|Jul-17-06|| ||ganstaman: Regardless of DK's current situation, I was explaining his remarks from 2002. It is good to know that he is learning (good things like this come from posting your own ideas for others to critique). Thanks <keypusher> for that information.|
|Jul-17-06|| ||keypusher: <I'm not even sure I've ever seen any correct analysis from <drukenknight>.>|
Well, you certainly haven't seen any from me, or from most posters, that isn't computer-aided. He always thought for himself and didn't take whatever the books said as gospel.
|Jul-17-06|| ||ganstaman: DK has posted in a lot of places (almost 4700 times so far) on this site. Whether he's been right or wrong, he seems to have helped spur discussion and force others to really understand and explain their position. And like I said before, one of the best ways to learn is to allow yourself to be corrected by others.|
That said, he did seem a bit stubborn at times, but I still appreciate his postings here.
|Feb-04-09|| ||nasmichael: After playing through the "Guess the Move" challenge, I can appreciate the boldness of Nezhmetdinov more thoroughly. I like the way studying the board delivers the "why?" that a mature player would ask a less-experienced one--as this is a shorter game, I recommend it to players new to the challenge--|
For those who may be familiar, was this game part of a particular Master's Open?, --or to phrase it differently, what were the conditions of the tourney and what other players were there?
And for future questions like this one, do you know of websites that may have this information?
|Sep-22-09|| ||birthtimes: Interesting line that Nezh chose with 7. Bc4 as it had only been played once before (Littman-Bernstein, 1940) and he may not have seen it. Then again, he could have seen it played somewhere in the USSR, but after 7...a6, he was the first, and still the only, to play 8. Nxc6.|
It is not difficult to see why he played these moves. He was well-acquainted with the potential effects of a White bishop posted on the a2-g8 diagonal, especially before the opposing king had castled, and it is easy to see that Black's queenside pawn structure is weakened after 8. Nxc6.
It is also easy to see that 9. e5 leads either to 9...dxe5 10. Qf3 Be7 11. Rd1 or O-O or to 9...Qa5 10. Bxf6 gxf6 where Black's kingside pawn structure is weakened.
He also was well-aquainted with the principle of opening up the center files while the opposing king is still in the center, and simultaneously keeping his own queen on the d1-h5 or h5-e8 diagonals, which explains moves 11-16. After Black then played 16. Bb7 it is certainly no surprise that Nezh replied with 17. Bxe6.
There are however, two other lines that Tal didn't expound upon that could cause White some serious difficulties: 18. Qxe6+ Qe7 19. Qb3 Bc8! and 18. Qxe6+ Qe7 19. Qf5 Bc8 20. Qf3 Qc5!
Whether Nezh himself saw these two lines, one can only speculate. But it is easy seeing his thinking regarding the first 17 moves of this game...
|Jan-31-11|| ||Crocomule: The gnothi seauton game, as the old timers called it..|
|Mar-09-12|| ||jrichman38: Modern computers (houdini) show that 21...Qd6!! draws after 22.Qxd6 Bxd6 23.Nxh7 Rxh7 24.Rxh7 Be5!|
|Dec-16-16|| ||lost in space: <<Morphy86:> Hello all,
sorry for the stupid question (I'm quite a beginner), but it seems to me that Black has abandoned a bit too quickly... He doesn't seem to have a completely lost position! Sure, the 2 pawns difference is a bit annoying, yet... something maybe can still be done...... but maybe it's only my "fight to the end" mentality!!!! Thanks!!>|
I would also play on as Black in the final position of this game. Yes, 2 pawns down and 90% sure that Black will lose...But white still can make mistakes.
click for larger view
29...a5 30. Qe3+ Ka6 31. Kc1 Rab8 32. Qd3 Kb6 33. Qd4+ Ka6 34. Qc5 Kb7 and white will solwly making progress.
click for larger view
The issue for Black is the protection of Ph7 (later the one on a5) in the starting position so a quick development of both rooks is not that easy. Now next step of the plan for white is to start pushing Pf2
|Dec-16-16|| ||An Englishman: Good Evening: Always had this notion that playing the Sicilian vs. Nezhmetdinov was a bad idea. Turns out that specifically 2...Nc6 had very poor results--out of 28 games in the database, he only lost three games with the White pieces. In this game, he didn't even play his beloved 3.Bb5 and still won.|
|Dec-16-16|| ||The Kings Domain: Tough, fighting game with Nezhmetdinov ending it with a nice touch.|
|Dec-16-16|| ||morfishine: Nezhmetdinov games really should be off-limits for such childish game titles|
|Dec-16-16|| ||Kamagong42: absolute genius or pure imagination?|
|Dec-16-16|| ||ChessHigherCat: Suet in, Suet out!|
|Dec-16-16|| ||scutigera: <morfishine>: I've played through too many Gyula Sax games on this site to be offended by this pun: as discussed above, Nezhmetdinov's attack was dubiously sound, so "Rash Decision" is actually related to the game's content, which puts it well above median quality.|
|Dec-16-16|| ||thegoodanarchist: <PinkZebra: Isn't 16)...Be7 a better alternative than allowing the sacrifice on e6?>|
I love reading posts from the time before I was a cg.com member.
Hint: It was likely before you were too! :)
|Dec-16-16|| ||thegoodanarchist: <morfishine: Nezhmetdinov games really should be off-limits for such childish game titles>|
What about <'Shid I stay or 'Shid I go now?>
|Jun-16-18|| ||WorstPlayerEver: SF: 18... Qe7 19. Qb3 Bg7 20. Rg1 a5 -1
-18... Qe7 19. Qh5 Bc8 20. Qf3 Qc5=
-21. Nd7 +6.5 (instead of 21. Rd7 Qd6= <jrichman38>)
|Jun-16-18|| ||WorstPlayerEver: 21. Nd7+ Bxd7 22. Rxd7 Qxd7 23. Qxd7 Rd8 24. Qxc6 I assume Nezh accidentally touched their Rook ;)|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·